pmhi COPY. 







Class 
Book. 



Copyright ]^^. 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSITS 



- ■♦ 



•^ 



DR. BRIGGS'S WORKS. 



A General Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture. 
Crown 8vo, net ....... ^3.00 

Messianic Prophecy : The Prediction of the Fulfilment of 
Redemption through the Messiah. A critical study of the 
Messianic passages of the Old Testament in the order of their 
development. Seventh edition, crown 8vo . . . 2.50 

The Messiah of the Gospels. Crown 8vo . . . 2.00 

The Messiah of the Apostles. Crown 8vo . . 3.00 

The Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch. New edition, 
revised and enlarged. Crown 8vo . . . .2.50 

The Bible, the Church, and the Reason : The Three 
Great Fountains of Divine Authority. Second edition, crown 
8vo 1.75 

American Presbyterianism : Its Origin and Early History, 
together with an Appendix of Letters and Documents, many of 
which have recently been discovered. Crown 8vo, with maps 3.00 

Whither ? A Theological Question for the Times. Third 
edition, crown 8vo . . . . . . • i'75 

The Authority of Holy Scripture. An Inaugural Ad- 
dress. Ninth edition, crown 8vo, paper . . .50 cents 

The Defense of Professor Briggs. Crown 8vo, paper, net 50 cents 

The Case against Professor Briggs. Three parts, crown 
8vo, paper. Parts I. and II., each, 50 cents j Part III. . 75 cents 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION 



STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION 



STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



THE PRINCIPLES, METHODS, HISTORY, ^ND RESULTS 

OF ITS SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS AND OF 

THE WHOLE 



BY 



CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D. 

EDWARD ROBINSON PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL THEOLOGY IN UNION 
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK CITY 



NEW YOEK 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 

1899 






COPYRIGHT, 1899, BY 
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 

TWO COPIES RECr^lVED. 




NorfajoolJ ^resa 

J. S Cushing & Co. — Berwick & Smith 
Norwood Mass. U.S.A. 



V^Vo — 



;^^ 



TO 

E\}t Alumni anti Stutimts 

OF UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK CITY 
WHO HAVE STUDIED WITH ME 

THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED IN RECOGNITION OF 

THEIR FIDELITY IN TESTING TIMES 

AND IN HOLY LOVE 

ON THE TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY 

OF MY PROFESSORATE 



0' 










PEEFACE 

In 1883 the volume entitled Biblical Study^ its Princi]?les^ 
Methods^ and History^ together with a Catalogue of Books of 
Reference was published. In the preface it was said : " This 
work is the product of the author's experience as a student of 
the Bible, and a teacher of theological students in Biblical 
Study. From time to time, during the past fourteen years, he 
has been called upon to give special attention to particular 
themes in public addresses and Review articles. In this way 
the ground of Biblical Study has been quite well covered. 
This scattered material has been gathered, and worked over 
into an organic system." 

The volume has been issued from the press nine times since 
that date, and there still seems to be a demand for it on the 
part of the public. The author has long felt the need of a 
more thorough revision of the volume, as the result of fifteen 
years' additional study ; but he has been prevented by many 
hindrances from doing what he so greatly desired to do, until 
the present year. He has used his volume as a text-book in 
the Union Theological Seminary, New York, during all this 
period, and has gone over the whole subject afresh every year. 
This year being the twenty -fifth anniversary of his professorate, 
he felt impelled to undertake the task, and to make out of the 
volume a new one, which would cover the whole ground of the 
study of Holy Scripture, and the results of all that study during 
the past fifteen years. Accordingly the volume has not simply 



vi PKEEACE 

been revised, it has been made over into a new one. The 
material in the old book has become the nucleus of new mate- 
rial, so that this volume has grown to be fully twice the size 
of the original work. 

The twelve chapters of Biblical Study have been worked 
over and brought up to the present position of Biblical Science, 
and enriched with ample illustration of every important prin- 
ciple and method used in the study. The chapter on the Canon 
has grown into two chapters, in one of which the history of the 
Canon has been traced from the earliest times to the present, 
and in the other a careful statement of the criticism of the 
Canon has been given with the principles for discerning it and 
determining it with certainty. The chapter on the Text has 
grown into four chapters. This chapter was justly criticised for 
its incompleteness, as compared with other sections of the book. 
I have given great pains to this department, and have traced 
in successive chapters the history of the text of the Hebrew 
Bible, the history of the text of the Greek Bible, and the trans- 
lations of the Bible, and have explained the practice of Textual 
Criticism, giving illustrations of every important principle. I 
have continued the history of the Higher Criticism down to 
the present time. Owing to circumstances beyond my control, 
I was compelled to undergo an ecclesiastical trial, and was con- 
demned for heresy for my views on this subject. This made 
my views and my trial a necessary part of the history of Higher 
Criticism, and compelled me to give these a place in the history. 
I have aimed to be as objective as possible. I have greatly 
enlarged my treatment of the Holy Scripture as Literature. 
In the chapter on Prose Literature, I have given a very full 
discussion of Biblical History, and especially of the Prose 
Works of the Imagination in the Old Testament. The chapter 
on Hebrew Poetry has grown into four chapters, in which I 
endeavour by ample illustrations to set forth those views of 



PREFACE Vll 

Hebrew Poetry which I have held and taught for the past 
twenty-five years with increasing confidence. Illustrations 
from the New Testament as well as from the Old Testament 
are given here as elsewhere throughout the book. Some of 
my readers may be surprised at the amount of poetry found in 
the New Testament. But I think that they will see from the 
illustrations given that if the views of Hebrew Poetry taken in 
the volume are correct, the specimens from the New Testament 
are as fine and sure specimens as those from the Old Testament. 
In the preface to Biblical Study^ it was said : " The ground 
for Biblical Study has been covered, with the exception of 
Biblical History. This department has been included in the 
Reference Library because it seemed necessary for complete- 
ness. It has been omitted from the discussions because it is 
usual to classify Biblical History with Historical Theology. 
The author did not care to determine this disputed question in 
a work already sufficiently extensive." In this volume I have 
made up that defect ; not only because it was a defect, but 
because in fact the Historical Criticism of Biblical History has 
become a burning question, and it is likely to burn with in- 
creasing flame and heat during the present generation. These 
chapters have cost me much labour. They open up the most 
difficult part of this work, and it is probable that in these I 
expose myself to the greatest criticism on the part of the so- 
called conservatives. I have composed these chapters with 
great painstaking and mth a good conscience, and a deep sense 
of a call to public duty in this regard. I have prepared the 
way by a history of the study of Biblical History, then have 
opened up the principles and methods of Historical Criticism 
with ample illustrations, and finally I have endeavoured to 
organize and construct the discipline of Biblical History. 
Grave mistakes have been made in recent years in the dis- 
cussions of the Higher Criticism. Is it too much to hope that 



Vlll PREFACE 

they will not be repeated in the discussions of the Historical 
Criticism ? 

I have given two new chapters, one on the Credibility of 
Holy Scripture, the other on the Truthfulness of Holy Script- 
ure. These chapters deal with burning questions also, which 
I have already considered at some length during my defence 
to the charges brought against me, touching the question of 
"the Inerrancy of Holy Scripture." I have, in these chapters, 
discussed the question from the point of view of the induction 
of facts from all the ranges of the Study of Holy Scripture ; 
and have then carefully tested the so-called " a priori argu- 
ment for the Inerrancy of Holy Scripture." I shall doubtless 
increase my offence in the eyes of those who condemned me 
before ; but I have confidence that I have so stated the case as 
to give relief and help to the multitudes who have been dis- 
turbed and even crowded from Holy Church and Holy Scripture 
by the Pharisees of our times ; and it is my comfort that I 
shall lead not a few, by these chapters, as I have by the grace 
of God through my other writings, back to Holy Scripture and 
Holy Church, with a firmer faith and a holy joy and love in 
their exhibition of the grace and glory of our God and Saviour. 

The Table of Contents gives a full analysis of the volume. 
There are two indices. The Index of Texts may be used for 
reference in the exposition of a large number of the most im- 
portant and difficult passages of Holy Scripture. The large- 
face type shows at a glance the most important references. 
The large-face type of the Index of Authors and Writings 
gives the passage where citations are made, or opinions are 
discussed, or titles of works are first given. The Bibliography 
of each subject may be found in its appropriate place in the 
volume in connection with the history of the discipline. The 
index will easily guide to all the titles of the books. There is 
really a much fuller bibliography in this volume proportion- 



PREFACE ix 

ately than in the classified list of books given as an appendix 
to Biblical Study. 

No one can read this book, whatever his opinion as to its 
merits may be, without saying that it corresponds with its title, 
and that the Bible is to the author Holy Scripture, 

Biblical Study was dedicated to Roswell D. Hitchcock, 
D.D., LL.D., and Isaac A. Dorner, D.D., "survivors of two 
noble faculties to whom the author owes his theological train- 
ing." These teachers have followed all my other teachers into 
the presence of our Lord. On this twenty-fifth anniversary of 
my professorate it seems appropriate, having become the senior 
professor in the Union Theological Seminary, that I should 
dedicate this volume to my pupils. This is especially gratify- 
ing because of the well-known loyalty with which they stood 
by me in those trying years when I was battling for truth and 
righteousness against an unreasoning panic about the Bible, 
and an anti-revision partisanship against those who had taken 
an active part in the movement for a revision of the West- 
minster Confession and the preparation of a new consensus 
creed ; and also in those more trying years in which I suffered 
tlie penalties of unrighteous and illegal ecclesiastical discipline. 
In the class-room they have encouraged me by their studious 
attention, their confidence, and their enthusiasm ; in the minis- 
try they have been faithful and loyal. I feel bound to them 
not only as a teacher and a friend, but in the stronger bond of 
that Holy Love which Our Master taught, and which I have 
endeavoured also, in so far as I was able, to teach them. One 
of these pupils is my daughter, Emilie Grace Briggs, B.D., 
without whose patient, laborious, and scholarly help I could 
not have finished this volume. To her my thanks are due, in 

public as well as in private. 

C. A. BRIGGS. 
January, 1899. 



CONTENTS 

CH5^PTEE I 
THE ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Biblical Study tlie most important of all studies, 1 , tlie most extensive, 1 ; the 
most profound, 2 ; the most attractive, 3. 

Obstacles to the study of Holy Scripture, 4 ; Bibliolatry, 5 ; Sectarian partisan- 
ship, 6 ; using the Bible as an obstruction to progress, 8. 

CHAPTER II 

THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

General term of the department, 12 ; relation to other departments, 12. 
Biblical Literature, 18 ; Biblical Canonics, 21 ; Textual Criticism, 23 j the 

Higher Criticism, 24. 
Biblical Exegesis, 27 ; Biblical Hermeneutics, 27. 

Biblical History, 35 ; Historical Criticism, 37 ; Biblical Archseology, 37. 
Biblical Theology, 39 ; Biblical Religion, Faith, and Ethics, 40. 

CHAPTEE III 
THE LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The languages of the Bible prepared by Providence for the purpose, 42. 

The Shemitic family, 46 ; the Arabic group, 46 ; the Assyrian group, 47 ; the 
Hebrew group, 47 ; the Aramaic group, 49. 

The Hebrew language, 51 ; its origin, 51 ; simple and natural, 54 ; correspond- 
ence of language and thought, 55 ; majesty and sublimity, 56 ; life and 
fervour, 59. 

The Aramaic language, 61 ; language of commerce in Persian period, 61 ; com- 
mon speech of Palestine in the time of Jesus, 62. 

The Greek language, 64 ; complex and artistic, 65 ; style of speech, 66 ; beauti- 
ful and finished, 66 ; strength and vigour, 67 ; Hebraistic colouring, 68 ; 
transformed for expression of Christian ideas, 70. 



XU CONTENTS 



1 



CHAPTEE IV 
HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 

Inherent necessity of criticism, 76 ; historical necessity, 77. 

What is Criticism ? 78 ; a method of knowledge, 79 ; destructive and construc- 
tive, 79 ; requires careful training to use it, 80. 

Principles of criticism, 81 ; derived from General Criticism, 81 ; from Historical 
Criticism, 82 ; from Literary Criticism, 85 ; Textual Criticism, 86 ; the 
Higher Criticism, 92 ; integrity, 92 ; authenticity, 93 ; literary features, 94 ; 
credibility, 95 ; historical position, 95 ; differences of style, 97 ; differences 
of opinion, 99 ; citations, 100 ; positive testimony, 101 ; silence, 101 ; Bentley 
and the Epistle of Phalaris, 107. 

Criticism of Holy Scripture, 109 ; confronted by traditional theories, 109 ; un- 
hindered by decisions of the Church, 112 ; or Catholic tradition, 115 ; 
demanded by the truth-loving spirit, 115. 

CHAPTER V 
HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

History of the term Canon, 117 ; Holy Scripture and Covenant, 117. 

Formation of the Old Testament Canon, 118 ; The Ten Words, 118 ; Deuter- 
onomic Code, 119 ; the Law, 120; tradition of the fixing of the Canon by 
Ezra, 120 ; by the Great Synagogue, 121 ; the Prophets, 123 ; the Writings, 
124 ; evidence of Ben Sirach, 124 ; of the Septuagint, 124 ; of Philo and 
Josephus, 125 ; disputes of the Pharisees as to the Canon, 128 ; final determi- 
nation of the Canon at Jamnia, 130. 

Canon of Jesus and His Apostles, 131 ; general terms do not decide, 131 ; they 
abstain from using writings disputed among the Jews, 131 ; they do not 
determine the Canon except as to the authority of certain writings, 132. 

Formation of the Canon of the New Testament, 133 ; the Gospels, 133 ; the 
Pauline Epistles, 134 ; the Catholic Epistles, 134. 

The Canon of the Church, 137 ; Decisions of Synods, 137 ; two streams of 
tradition, 138 ; Canon of the Codices, 138. 

CHAPTEE VI 
CRITICISM OF THE CANON 

The Canon in the Reformation, 140 ; Luther and the Reformers, 142 ; Decision 

of the Council of Trent, 143 ; the Protestant principle, 144 ; Protestant 

scholasticism, 147. 
The Canon of the British Reformation, 140 ; the Articles of Religion, 148 ; 

the Scotch Confession, 149. 
The Puritan Canon, 149 ; The Westminster Confession, 150 ; Cosin, 151 ; Herle, 

152 ; Lyford, 154. 



CONTENTS XIU 

The Canon of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, 155 ; dogmatic reac- 
tion, 156 ; Semler, 158. 

Modern American theory of the Canon, 158 ; the Princeton School, 159 ; Canon- 
icity and Authenticity, 160. 

Determination of the Canon, 163 ; testimony of the Church, 163 ; character of 
Holy Scripture, 165 ; witness of the Holy Spirit, 166. 



CHAPTEE yil 
HISTOKY or THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 

The original text of the Hebrew Bible, 169 ; primitive script, 170 ; Aramaic 
script, 171 ; editorial work of the early scribes, 173. 

The text of the Sopherim, 174 ; the official text, 175 ; the work of the Sopherim, 
176. 

The Massoretic text, 180 ; vowel points and accents, 181 ; work of the Massorites, 
182. 

Hebrew Manuscripts, 183 ; Palestinian, 183 ; Babylonian, 185 ; Samaritan Codex, 
185. 

Printed texts, 186 ; earliest text, 186 ; Complutensian text, 186 ; second Rab- 
binical Bible, 186 ; Baer and Ginsburg, 187. 



CHAPTEE VIII 

HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 

The Greek Septuagint, 188 ; translated gradually in the order, Law, Prophets, 

Writings, 188. 
The Greek New Testament, 190 ; at first separate writings on rolls, 190 ; no 

codex till third century, 191. 
Other Greek versions, 191 ; Aquila, 191 ; Theodotian, 192 ; Symmachus, 192. 
Official Greek texts, 192 ; Origen's Hexapla, 192 ; Hesychius, 193 ; Lucian, 193. 
Manuscripts of the Greek Bible, 195 ; Majuscules and Minuscules, 195. 
The Neutral text, 195 ; Vatican Codex, 195 ; Sinaitic Codex, 196. 
The Egyptian text, 197 ; Alexandrian Codex, 197 ; Codex Ephraem, 198. 
Text of the Hexapla, 200 ; recently discovered Hexapla text, 200. 
Western text, 200 ; Codex Bezae, 200 ; recent discussions of Western text by 

Harris and Blass, 202. 
Text of Lucian, 203 ; relation to Josephus, 203. 
Later Syrian text, 205 ; characteristic conflation, 205. 
Printed Greek texts, 206 ; Complutensian, 206 ; Erasmus, 206 ; Aldine, 206 ; 

Stephens, 206 ; Beza, 206 ; Sixtine, 207 ; Elzevir, 207 ; Mill, 207 ; Bengel, 

207 ; Wetstein, 207 ; Griesbach, 207 ; Holmes and Parsons, 207 ; Lachmann, 

208 ; Tischendorf, 208 ; Tregelles, 209 ; Westcott and Hort, 209 ; Lagarde, 
209; Swete, 209. 



XIV CONTENTS 



CHAPTEE IX 

THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 

Aramaic Targums, 210 ; Onkelos, 211 ; Jonathan, 211 ; others, 211. 

The Syriac Bible, 212 ; Curetonian, 212 ; Peshitto, 212 ; Haraklean, 212. 

The Latin Vulgate, 213 ; Jerome's version, 213 ; Codex Amiatinus, 213 ; Sixtine 

edition, 213 ; Clementine edition, 213. 
The Arabic version, 214 ; Saadia, 214 ; others, 214. 
Persian version, 214 ; Tawus, 214. 
English versions, 214 ; Tyndale, 214 ; Rogers, 215 ; Tavemer, 215 ; Coverdale, 

215 ; Great Bible, 215 ; Genevan, 215 ; Douay, 215 ; Authorized Version, 

216 ; Revised Version, 216. 
Other versions, 216 ; German, 216 ; French, 217 ; Dutch, 217 ; others, 217. 



CHAPTER X 

TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Textual criticism at the Reformation, 219; Ximenes, 219; Levlta and Ben 
Chayim, 209 ; de Rossi and Scholastics, 221. 

Textual criticism in the seventeenth century, 222 ; Cappellus, Morinus, and 
Buxtorf, 222 ; Walton and Owen, 224 ; Matthew Pool, 226. 

Textual criticism in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, 226 ; Bentley and 
Mill, 227 ; Lowth, 228 ; Wetstein, Griesbach, Lachmann, 227 ; Tischendorf 
and Gregory, 228; Westcott and Hort, 228; Keil, Green, and W. R. 
Smith, 229. 

Application of textual criticism to Holy Scripture, 231. 

The genealogical principle, 231 ; text of Ben Asher, 231 ; the Mishna, Baraithoth, 
and Gemara, 232 ; Midrashim, 234 ; Jewish rabbins, 235 ; use of ancient 
versions, 236; Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, 237 ; the original autographs, 
238 ; illustrations of the genealogical principle, 239 ; genealogy of the Greek 
Bible, 240. 

Conflation and other corruptions, 242 ; illustrations from the Gospels, 242 ; 
illustrations from the Old Testament, 242 ; corruptions of alphabetical 
Psalms, 242 ; dittography, 243 ; wrong separation of words, 243 ; slips of 
the eye, 244 ; an original logion of Jesus, 244. 

CHAPTEK XI 

HISTORY OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The 'Higher Criticism in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, 247; of the 
Reformers, 247 ; of the Puritans, 248 ; of the Reformed Theologians, 249 ; 
Bentley and Boyle, 250 ; how to deal with traditional theories, 251. 



CONTENTS XV 

The Rabbinical theories, 252 ; the Baba Bathra's statement, 252 ; the Gemara 
upon it, 266. 

Hellenistic and Christian theories, 256 ; Josephus and Philo, 256; Apocalypse 
of Ezra, 257 ; the Fathers, 257. 

The New Testament view of the Old Testament, 259 ; Jesus and criticism, 259 ; 
New Testament use of the Writings, 261 ; of the Psalter, 262 ; of the 
Prophets, 265 ; of the Law, 268. 

Rise of the Higher Criticism, 273 ; Spinoza and Simon, 274 ; scholastic opposi- 
tion, 276 ; mediating theories, 276 ; Astruc's discovery, 278 ; Eichhorn's 
documentary hypothesis, 279. 

Higher Criticism of the nineteenth century, 282 ; Geddes, Vater, and the frag- 
mentary hypothesis, 282 ; De Wette and the genesis of documents, 285 ; 
Reuss, Wellhausen, and the development hypothesis, 283 ; Home, 284 ; 
Colenso, 284 j Samuel Davidson, 285-, W. Robertson Smith, 286; Toy, 
Briggs, and H. P. Smith, 286 ; more recent Higher Criticism, 289. 



CHAPTER XII 

PRACTICE OE THE HIGHER CRITICISM 

Literary study of the Bible, 293 ; Literary training necessary, 293. 

The Historical Evidence, 295 ; the Second Isaiah, 295 ; date of the Apocalypse 

of John, 296. 
The evidence of style, 296 ; etymological differences, 296 ; syntactical differences, 

300 ; dialectic differences, 300 ; differences of style, 300 ; description of 

Leviathan, 301 ; Epistle to the Hebrews, 301. 
The evidence of opinion, 302 ; theophanies of the Hexateuch, 302 ; Holy Spirit 

in Isaiah, 303 ; Messiah of the Apocalypse, 303. 
The evidence of citation, 304 ; in the Psalter, 304 ; in Jonah's Psalm, 305 ; 

Logion in the Gospels, 305. 
The evidence of testimony, 306 ; Micah in Jeremiah, 306 ; Saint Paul in Second 

Peter, 307. 
Argument from silence, 307 ; not within the author's scope, 307 ; within his 

scope, 307 ; reasons for silence, 308. 
The Integrity of Scripture, 309 ; single writings, 309 ; collections of writings by 

same author, 310 ; by different authors, 310 ; edited works, 310 ; inter- 
polations, 314. 
The Authenticity of Scripture, 317 ; name of author given, 317 ; traditional 

ascription, 318. 
Anonymous Holy Scripture, 319 ; Histories, 319 ; "Wisdom Literature, 320 ; 

Psalter, 321 ; Law, 322. 
Pseudonymous Holy Scripture, 323 ; not forgeries, 323 ; pseudepigrapha, 324 ; 

Biblical pseudonyms, 325. 
Compilations, 326 ; Kings and Chronicles, 326 ; Luke and Acts, 326 ; Matthew 

and John, 327. 



xvi CONTENTS 

CHAPTEE XIII 
BIBLICAL PBOSE LITEBATUBE 

Poetry and Prose, 328 ; Bhetorical Prose and Poetry, 329. 

Historical Prose, 329 ; Prophetic and Priestly History, 329 ; three strata of 
Prophetic History, 330; the four Gospels and Acts, 330. 

Historical use of the Myth, 333 ; Monotheistic myths, 333 ; Sons of God and 
daughters of men, 333 ; Samson, 333. 

Historical use of the Legend, 335 ; early chapters of Genesis, 335 ; legends in 
the life of David, 336 ; poetic legends, 337. 

Prophetic Discourse, 338 ; oratory in prophetic histories, 338 ; prophetic elo- 
quence, 339 ; discourses of Jesus, 339 ; of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, 339. 

The Epistle, 340 ; Letters in Ezra and Nehemiah, 340 ; Epistles of the New 
Testament, 340. 

Prose works of the Imagination, 341 ; Haggada of Babbins, 341 ; Parables of 
Jesus, 341 ; apocryphal stories, 342 ; poetic works of the imagination, 342. 

The Book of Buth an Idyll, 342 ; scenery of the times of the Judges, 343 ; 
ideal picture, 343 ; conflict with Deuteronomic law, 343 ; historic basis, 344. 

The Story of Jonah, 345 ; sets forth a prophetic lesson, 345 ; the miracles are 
marvels, 345 ; the ideal repentance, 346 ; the prayer figurative, 347 ; an 
early Haggada, 348 ; a marvel of the love of God, 349. 

The story of Esther, 349 ; historic discrepancies, 350 ; does not explain Purim, 
350 ; Esther, heroine of patriotism, 350. 

The stories of Daniel, 351 ; a Maccabean book, 351 ; Aramaic stories, 351 ; his- 
torical discrepancies, 352 j historic fiction, 352. 



CHAPTER XIV 
CHABACTEBISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETBY 

Features of Hebrew poetry, 355 ; religious poetry, 356 ; simple and natural, 357 ; 

subjective, 358 ; sententious, 358 ; realistic, 359. 
Ancient theories of Hebrew poetry, 361 ; compared with Arabic poetry, 361 ; 

compared with classical metres, 362. 
Modern theories, 363 ; Jones, 363 ; Saalchutz, 363 ; Bickell, 364 ; Ewald, 365. 
Lowth's doctrine of parallelism, 366 ; Bishop Jebb's introverted parallelism, 367 ; 

the stairlike movement, 367. 
Ley's theory of measures, 369 ; Briggs' early views, 370 ; primary and secondary 

poetic accent, 370. 
Poetic language, 371 ; full sounding forms, 371 ; archaisms, 371. 



CONTENTS XVll 



CHAPTEE XV 
THE MEASURES OE BIBLICAL POETRY 

Assonance and rhyme, 373 ; identical suffixes, 373 ; assonance, 375 ; word play, 

375. 
Measures by word or accent, 376 ; trimeter, 376 ; tetrameter, 379 ; pentameter, 

380 ; hexameter, 382 ; varying measures, 384. 

CHAPTER XVI 
THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 

Parallelism of members, 385 ; the couplet, 385 ; the triplet, 388 ; the tetrastich, 
390 ; the pentastich, 392 ; the hexastich, 394 ; the heptastich, 395 ; the 
octastich, 397 ; the decastich, 397. 

The strophe, 398 ; of two lines, 400 ; of three lines, 401 ; of four lines, 401 ; of 
five lines, 402 ; of six lines, 403 ; of seven lines, 406 ; of eight lines, 407 ; of 
nine lines, 410 ; of ten lines, 411 ; of twelve lines, 411 ; of fourteen lines, 
412 ; unequal strophes, 413. 

CHAPTER XVII 
THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 

Lyric poetry, 415 ; the hymn, prayer, and song of Moses, 415 ; Psalter, 415 ; 

Lamentations, 415. 
Gnomic poetry, 416 ; fable, 416 ; riddle, 417 ; temperance poem, 418 ; gnome of 

the sluggard, 418. 
Composite poetry, 418 ; dramatic poetry, 419 ; Psalm xxiv. 419 ; Hosea xiv. 419 ; 

Job, 420 ; Song of Songs, 420 ; Poetry of Wisdom, 422 ; Job xxxi. 422 ; 

prophetic poetry, 424 ; Isaiah liii. 424. 

CHAPTEE XVIII 
HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Oral and written Word, 427 ; general interpretation, 428 ; art of understanding 

and explaining, 428. 
Rabbinical interpretation, 429 ; legal or Halacha, 430 ; illustrative or Haggada, 

431 ; allegorical or Sodh, 432 ; Cabala or mystic, 432 ; literal or Peshat, 433. 
Hellenistic interpretation, 434 ; allegorical method of Philo, 434 ; rules of 

allegory, 435. 
Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New Testament, 436 ; Jesus' use of 

the Halacha, 437 ; of Haggada, 438 ; of the Sodh, 438 ; Jesus' characteristic 

methods, 441 ; methods of the apostles, 443. 



XVlll CONTENTS 

Interpretation of the Fathers and of the Schoolmen, 447 ; Tertullian, 447 ; 
Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, 448 ; Tychonius' rules, 449 ; Augustine's 
rules, 449 ; Antiochan school, 451 ; tradition and ecclesiastical authority, 
453 ; Epitomes, Postiles, Glosses, 454 ; Lyra, 454 ; Council of Trent, 455. 

Interpretation of the Reformers and their successors, 456 ; Erasmus and Tyn- 
dale, 456 ; the Protestant principle, 457 ; the scholastics, 458. 

The Interpretation of the Puritan and Arminians, 459 ; Cartwright, 459 ; Ball, 
460 ; Westminster Confession, 461 ; Leigh, 462 ; Erancis Eoberts, 464 ; Fed- 
eral school, 466 ; Pietism, 467 ; Grotius, Hammond, and John Taylor, 468. 

Biblical interpretation of modern times, 469 ; Ernesti, 469 ; Semler, 469 ; the 
grammatico-historical method, 470 ; Schleiermacher and the organic method, 
471 ; the method of interpretation of Scripture as the history of redemption, 
472. 

CHAPTEE XIX 

THE PRACTICE OF INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Grammatical interpretation, 474 ; philological study, 474 ; great improvement in 

knowledge of Biblical languages, 475. 
Logical and rhetorical interpretation, 476 ; laws of thought, 476 ; logic of Bibli- 
cal authors, 477 ; Biblical rhetoric, 478. 
Historical interpretation, 478 ; mistakes of supernaturalism, 479 ; tradition versus 

history, 479. 
Comparative interpretation, 480 ; mistakes of rationalists, 480 ; unity in variety, 

480. 
The literature of interpretation, 481 ; magnitude of the literature, 481 ; consent 

of the fathers, 481 ; bondage to the theologians, 482. 
Doctrinal interpretation, 483 ; the rule of faith, 483 ; the analogy of faith in the 

substance of Holy Scripture, 483. 
Practical interpretation, 484 ; the Bible a book of life, 484 ; Holy Spirit the 

supreme interpreter, 485. 

CHAPTER XX 
HISTORY OF THE STUDY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 

The use of Biblical History prior to the sixteenth century, 487 ; Josephus, 487 ; 
Tatian, Hegesippus, and Julius Africanus, 488 ; Eusebius, 489 ; Sulpicius 
Severus and Augustine, 489 ; Rudolf of Saxony, 489. 

Study of Biblical History in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, 489 ; Har- 
monies, 490 ; arch^ological writers, 490. 

Study of Biblical History in the eighteenth century, 490 ; conflict of supernatu- 
ralists with Deism, Atheism, and Rationalism, 490 ; mediating efforts, 491. 

Biblical History in the nineteenth century, 491 ; Herder and Eichhorn, 491 ; 
Deists and Thomas Payne, 492, 

The mythical hypothesis, 493 ; DeWette and G. L. Baur, 493 ; Strauss, 493 ; 
Ullmann, 495 ; failure of mythical hypothesis, 496. 



CONTENTS xix 

The legendary hypothesis, 497 ; Kenan, 497 ; failure of the legendary hypothe- 
sis, 498. 

The development hypothesis, 498 ; F. C. Baur and Vatke, 498 ; schools of Baur 
and Neander, 499 ; Eitschl, 500 ; Harnack, 500 ; criticism of the school of 
Kitschl, 503 ; Ewald, 504 ; Wellhausen, 504 ; Stade, Kittel, and Kent, 504 ; 
Graetz and Jost, 505. 

Advance in several departments of Biblical History, 505 ; the rise of contem- 
porary history, 505 ; Schneckenberger and Berthean, 505 ; more recent 
studies in Oriental archaeology, 506 ; unscientific methods of Sayce and 
Hommel, 506 ; Robinson, the father of modern Biblical geography, 507 ; 
Biblical geography since Robinson, 507. 

The results of historical criticism, 508 ; defects of the older histories, 509 ; a 
new Biblical History, 510. 

CHAPTER XXI 
THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 

Genesis of historical material, 511 ; illustrated from Biblical chronology, 512 ; 

from the history of the chronicler, 513 ; from naming of Saint Peter, 514 ; 

from speaking with tongues at Pentecost, 517. 
Genuineness of historical material, 519 ; illustrated in question of the historicity 

of Daniel, 519 ; of erroneous historical statements, 520 ; rashness in finding 

errors, 521 ; the myth, 521 ; Arabic gospel of infancy, 522 ; the virgin birth 

not a myth, 522 ; legends, 527 ; used in the epistles, 527 ; in the Gospels, 527, 
Reliability of historical material, 529 ; illustrated by the story of the Deluge, 

529 ; Water from the Rock, 529 ; Census of Quirinius, 530. 
The Aim of Historical Criticism, 531 ; removal of erroneous traditions, 531 ; the 

recovery of historic truth and fact, 532. 

CHAPTER XXII 
BIBLICAL HISTORY 

The Scope of Biblical History, 533 ; Biblical histories, 533 ; History contained 
in other Holy Scriptures, 533. 

Contemporary History, 534 ; of the ancient empires, 534 ; of New Testament 
times, 534. 

The History of Israel, 535 ; part of Universal History, 535 ; other nations guided 
by Providence, 537. 

Biblical History proper, 538 ; the types of Biblical History, 538 ; the theophanic 
presence, 542 ; the kingdom of redemption, 547 ; divine fatherly discipline, 
549 ; sovereignty of the Holy God, 550. 

The Order of Biblical History, 553 ; History of the Old Covenant and New Cov- 
enant, 553 ; Moses, David, Ezra, 553 ; Forerunners of Christ, Christ, and 
his Apostles, 553. 

Sections of Biblical History, 554 ; Biblical chronology and geography, 554 ; Bib- 
lical archseology, 554. 



XX CONTENTS 

Sources of Biblical History, 555 ; mythical sources, 557 ; legendary sources, 558 ; 

poetical sources, 559 ; ancient laws, 560 ; documentary sources, 563. 
The Historic Imagination, 564. 

CHAPTER XXIII 
BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 

The four types of theology, 569 ; the mystic, 570 ; the scholastic, 570 ; the 

speculative, 571 ; the practical, 571 ; the comprehensive cathohc, 571 ; 

mingling of types, 572. 
Rise of Biblical Theology, 575 ; Zacharia and Ammon, 575 ; distinguished from 

dogmatics, 575 ; Gabler, 576 ; De Wette and Von Coin, 578 ; the historical 

principle, 576. 
Development of Biblical Theology, 578 ; Strauss, 578 ; E. C. Baur, 578 ; theory 

of Jewish Christian, and Pauline parties, 578 ; Neander's theory of types, 

579 ; Schmid assigned Biblical Theology to Exegetical Theology, 579 ; Reuss 

and Lutterbeck set Biblical Theology in the midst of the religious ideas of 

the times, 583 ; Kuenen and Wellhausen, 585 ; recent investigations, 587 ; 

younger Ritschlians, 589. 
The Idea of Biblical Theology, 592 ; limited to canonical writings, 592 ; not a 

history of religion in Biblical times, 593 ; how related to Dogmatics, 594 ; 

the ethical element, 597 ; the element of religion, 597 ; the theology of the 

Bible in its historic formation, 598. 
The place of Biblical Theology, 599 ; not a part of Biblical History, 599 ; the 

highest section of the study of the Bible, 600 ; the fundamental source of all 

other divisions of Theology, 601. 
Methods of Biblical Theology, 601 ; the genetic method, 601 ; the inductive 

method, 602 ; the unity and variety, 602 ; blending of methods, 603. 
System of Biblical Theology, 603 ; the covenant the dominant principle, 604 ; 

historic divisions, 604 ; synthetic divisions, 604 ; the several types, 606. 



CHAPTEE XXIV 
THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Dogmatic theory of the infallibility of the Bible, 607 ; need of a reconstruction 
of the doctrine of the Bible, 607. 

The Bible and other sacred books, 608 ; errors in sacred books, 608 ; mistake of 
depreciating them, 609 ; their excellent features not derived from the Bible, 
610. 

Science and the Bible, 612 ; Bible subject to the criticism of Science, 613 ; Bible 
does not teach Science, 614 ; scientific errors do not destroy credibility, 614. 

The Canon and Inerrancy, 615 ; the question of errors in the original autographs, 
615 ; Canon is independent of the question of the autographs, 616 ; auto- 
graphs of authors and of editors, 618 ; autographs neglected by early Jews 
and Christians, 620. 



CONTENTS XXI 

Textual criticism and credibility, 621 ; errors in best texts obtainable, 621 ; no 
infallibility of vowel points or script, 621 ; the divine authority in transla- 
tions, 622 ; no stress to be laid on external letter of Scripture, 623 ; textual 
form not infallible, 624. 

The Higher Criticism and credibility, 627 ; traditional errors as to literature, 627 ; 
inconsistencies due to variation of sources and authors, 628 ; literary form 
not infallible, 629. 

Historical Criticism and credibility, 631 ; discrepancies, 631 ; errors in sources, 
631 ; historical form not infallible, 632 ; infallibility in substance of divine 
teaching as to religion, faith, and morals, 633. 



CHAPTER XXV 
THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Is the Bible the Word of God ? 634 ; it cannot be assumed but must be proved, 
634 ; essential truthfulness consistent with circumstantial errors, 635 ; human 
medium of revelation, 635 ; providential superintendence not inspiration, 
636. 

Must God speak inerrant words to men ? 637 ; argument from the Book of 
nature, 637 ; from theophanies, 638 ; from psychology and pedagogy, 638 ; 
from the methods of Jesus, 639 ; Bible inerrant only in its religious instruc- 
tion, 640. 

Gradual development of the Hebrew religion, 641 ; burnt-offerings of human 
beings, 641 ; sacrificial system, 642 ; laws of ceremonial sanctity, 643 ; in- 
stitutions of Israel elementary, 643. 

Gradual development of morality, 643 ; laws sufficient for the time, 643 ; but 
inadequate for a later age, 644 ; the ethics of falsehood, 644; the spirit of 
revenge, 644 ; Mosaic law of divorce, 645 ; the temporary and the eternal, 
645 ; ethics of Jesus, 645. 

Gradualness of Biblical doctrine, 646 ; doctrine of God, 646 ; vindictiveness, 646 ; 
anthropomorphisms, 647 ; doctrine of man, 647 ; doctrine of redemption, 
647 ; messianic ideals, 648 ; future life, 648 ; inadequateness of form, infal- 
libility of substance, 649. 



CHAPTER XXVI 

THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 

Redemption by the grace of God, 651; the principles of the Reformation in their 
harmony, 652. 

The Gospel in Holy Scripture, 652 ; relations of faith to Holy Scripture, 652 ; 
relation of grace to Holy Scripture, 653 ; exaltation of the person of Christ, 
664 ; organic work of the Divine Spirit in the Church, 654. 



xxii CONTENTS 

The Grace of God in Holy Scripture, 654 ; Scripture contains the Gospel of Sal- 
vation, 655 ; contains the redemption offered and applied in Christ, 656 ; 
grace of regeneration, 657 ; of sanctification, 668. 

The efficacy of Holy Scripture, 659 ; not ex opere operato, 660 ; dynamic in the 
experience of man, 660. 

The appropriation of the Grace of Holy Scripture, 660 ; attention, 661 ; faith, 
665 ; practice, 668. 



INDICES 



Texts of Holy Scripture, 671. 
Books, Authors, and Subjects, 679. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION 



STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



CHAPTER I 

THE ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

1. Biblical Study is the most important of all studies, for 
it is the study of the Word of God, which contains a divine 
revelation of redemption to the world. Nowhere else can such 
a redemption be found save where it has been derived from this 
fountain source or from those sacred persons, institutions, and 
events presented to us in the Bible. The Bible is the chief 
source of the Christian religion. Christian theology, and Chris- 
tian life. While other secondary and subsidiary sources may 
be used to advantage in connection with this principal source, 
they cannot dispense with it. For the Bible contains the reve- 
lation of redemption ; the Messiah and His kingdom are the 
central theme ; its varying contents lead by myriads of paths 
in converging lines to the throne of the God of grace. The 
Bible is the sure way of life, wisdom, and blessedness. 

2. Biblical Study is the most extensive of all studies, for its 
themes are the central themes which are inextricably entwined 
in all knowledge. Into its channels every other study pours 
its supply as all the brooks and rivers flow into the ocean. The 
study of the Bible is a study for men of every class and every 
occupation in life, for all the world. No profound scholar in 
any department of investigation can avoid the Bible. Sooner 
or later his special studies will lead him thither. The Bible 
is an ocean of heavenly wisdom. The little child may sport 
upon its shores and derive instruction and delight. The most 
accomplished scholar finds its vast extent and mysterious 
depths beyond his grasp. 



2 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

We open the Bible and on its earliest pages are confronted 
with the story of the origin of the world, the creation of man, 
and the problem of evil. The biblical histories present, in 
brief yet impressive outlines, the struggle of good and evil, 
the strife of tribes and nations, and, above all, the interplay 
of divine and human forces, showing that a divine plan of the 
world is unfolding. The springs of human action, the secrets 
of human experience and motive, are disclosed in the measures 
of psalm and proverb. The character, attributes, and pur- 
poses of God are unveiled in the strains of holy prophets. The 
union of God and man in redemption is displayed in the prog- 
ress of its literature. Two great covenants divide the plan 
of redemption into the old covenant and the new. The former 
presents us instructions which are a marvel of righteousness, 
sacredness, and love ; institutions that are symmetrical and 
grand, combining, as nowhere else, the real and the ideal, — 
the light and guide to Israel bearing on to the new covenant. 
In the latter the Messiah presents His achievements of redemp- 
tion in which are stored up the forces which have shaped the 
Christian centuries, and the secrets of the everlasting future. 
All the sciences and arts, all the literatures and histories, all 
the philosophies and religions of the world, gather about the 
Bible to make contribution to its study and derive help from 
its instruction. A student of the Bible needs encyclopsedic 
knowledge. The Bible will never be mastered in all its parts 
until it is set in the midst of universal knowledge. It comes 
from the Supreme Wisdom, and it can be comprehended only 
by those who have attained the heights of wisdom. 

3. Biblical Study is the most profound of all studies, for 
it has to do with the secrets of life and death, of God and man, 
of this world and other worlds. Its central contents are divine 
revelations. These came from God to man because man could 
not attain them otherwise. Even those contents of the Bible 
that are not revealed, are colored and shaped b}^ the revelations 
with which they are connected. All study which goes beyond 
the surface soon reaches the mysterious. There are many 
mysteries that patient and persistent investigation has solved ; 
others are in process of solution ; still others future study may 



ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY 3 

be able to solve. But the mysteries revealed in the Bible are 
those which man had not been able to attain by inductive and 
deductive investigation, and which it is improbable that he 
could have attained without special divine guidance, at least at 
the time that that knowledge was necessary for the progress 
of mankind at the stage in his historical development when the 
revelation was given. When the study of the other depart- 
ments of human learning has reached their uttermost limits, 
there still remains a wide expanse between those limits and the 
contents of divine revelation, which man cannot cross by his 
own unaided powers. Divine revelation is to the other depart- 
ments of human knowledge what heaven is to earth. It is above 
them, it encircles them, and it envelops them on every side. 
Like heaven, it discloses illimitable heights and breadths. 
Those things which are revealed lift the student of the Bible 
to regions of knowledge that reach forth to the infinite. And 
yet profound as the divine revelation is, it is simple. It is like 
the sunlight bearing its own evidence in itself. It is like the 
blue vault of heaven clear and bright. It is a revelation for 
babes as well as men, for the simple as well as the learned. 
God sendeth it as the rain on the just and the unjust, for " He 
is kind unto the unthankful and the evil." ^ The most profound 
study cannot master it. Any attentive study of it is rewarded 
with precious knowledge. 

4. Biblical Study is the most attractive of all studies. No- 
where else is there so great a variety in unity. The Literature 
of the Bible has been carefully selected out of a vastly greater 
extent of Literature by the taste of God's people in many suc- 
cessive generations, each one adding its approval to that of 
its predecessors. This taste determined that which was given 
for the permanent blessing of mankind and discriminated the 
writings gathered in the Bible from others which were tempo- 
rary, local, and provisional in their character. The wise 
guidance of the Divine Spirit on the one hand and the recogni- 
tion of excellence by God's people on the other hand, co-worked 
to produce Holy Scripture. 

In the Bible there is a wonderful variety of topic, covering 

1 Mt. 545 ; Lk. 635. 



4 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the whole field of Theology, that divine science which embraces 
and absorbs all human knowledge. In the Bible there is a 
marvellous richness of material combining in one organic whole 
the sublime and the beautiful in God, in man, in nature, and 
in the interrelation of God with man and nature. In the Bible 
there is an extraordinary wealth of literary form and style, 
representing the thinking and the emotions of many genera- 
tions ; composed in three of the greatest languages used as 
the vehicle of communion of man with man. 

In the Bible there is a magnificent unity and variety in 
history. Nowhe*re else are the generations of mankind so 
linked together. In the Bible the hearts of the fathers are 
turned to the children, and the hearts of the children to the 
fathers.^ Though the Jewish people constitute the central 
nucleus of this marvellous story, they are not the whole of it. 
They are the centre of a story which is as wide as humanity 
and whose circumference is the creation of God. 

The Bible is as various as human life is various. It is in- 
teresting to the child, it attracts the peasant, it charms the 
prince, it absorbs the sage. It is the Book of love, salvation, 
and glory for all the world. 

Obstacles to the Study of Holy Scripture 

The Bible is designed for the blessing of all mankind. But 
all have not enjoyed its benefits ; partly because those who have 
the Bible in their possession have not made it known to their 
fellow-men as they were commissioned to do by our Saviour ; ^ 
and partly because they have made the Bible known only so 
far as they understood it, or they supposed that their fellow- 
men were able to receive it. If they have given it to others 
at all, it has been in such bits of it as the teachers were able 
to explain to their humble and obedient pupils. Even in 
Christian lands, where the Bible may easily be found, there 
are few who experience its ideal advantages. Too many re- 
ligious teachers, in mistaken zeal, are so anxious to guard the 
sanctity of the Bible that they refrain from opening its treas- 
1 Mai. 46. 2 Mk. 1615. 



ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY 5 

ures to the free use of the people. Other teachers in all 
generations perpetuate the work of the Pharisees and obtrude 
their theories and speculations upon the Bible, making the 
Word of God of none effect through their traditions; they take 
away the key of knowledge ; they enter not in themselves, and 
them that are entering, in they hinder. ^ If the Bible has been 
withheld from the people by Roman priests, obstacles to the 
study of the Bible have been erected in the path of students 
by Protestant ministers. It would be a happy result if each 
could so expose the sin and guilt of the other as to induce both 
to bring forth fruits meet for repentance and to render entire 
obedience to the commission of Christ. 

1. The Study of the Bible is most commonly obstructed 
among Protestants by Bihliolatry. 

The Bible has been hedged about with awe as if the use of 
it, except in solemn circumstances and with special and pre- 
scribed devotional feelings, was a sin against the Holy Spirit. 
Men have been kept from the Bible as from the holy sacraments 
by dread of the serious consequences involved in any fault in 
their use. The Bible has been made an unnatural and unreal 
book, by attaching it exclusively to hours of devotion, and 
detaching it from the experiences of ordinary life. The study 
of the Bible will inevitably lead to holy and devout thoughts, 
will surely bring the student to the presence of God and His 
Christ, and will certainly secure the guidance of the Spirit of 
God. But it is a sad mistake to suppose that the Bible can be 
approached only in special frames of mind and with peculiar 
devotional preparation. It is not to be covered as with a fune- 
real pall and laid away for hours of sorrow and aiHiction. It 
is not to be placed upon an altar and its use reserved for hours 
of public or private worship. It is not to be regarded with^ 
feelings of bibliolatry.^ It is not to be used as a book of magic, 

1 Mt. 156; Mk. 713. Lk. 1152; Col. 28. 

2 It is noteworthy that the most radical Protestants, those who are most bitter 
in their denunciation of the adoration of the Holy Sacrament by such of their 
fellow-Christians as believe in the real substantial presence of our Lord therein, 
are the very ones who are most inclined to Bibliolatry. It is certainly no easier 
to think that our Saviour should dwell between the covers of a book than that 
He should be resident for a time in the bread of the Holy Communion. 



6 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

as if it had the mysterious power of determining all questions at 
the opening of the book.^ It is not to be used as a cabalistic 
book, to determine from its words and letters, the structure of its 
sentences, mysterious guidance for the initiated alone. ^ It is not 
to be used as an astrologer's horoscope, to discover from its won- 
drous symbolism, through seeming coincidences, the fulfilment 
of biblical prophecy in the events transpiring round about us or 
impending over us. The Bible is no such book as this. It is 
a book of life, a real book, a people's book. It is a blessed means 
of grace when used in devotional hours, — it has also holy les- 
sons and beauties of thought and sentiment for hours of leisure 
and recreation. It appeals to the aesthetic and intellectual 
as well as moral and spiritual faculties, the whole man in his 
whole life. Familiarity with the Bible is to be encouraged. 
It will not decrease, but rather enhance the reverence with 
which we ought to approach the Holy God in His Word. The 
Bible takes its place among the masterpieces of the world's 
literature. The use of it as such no more interferes with 
devotion than the beauty and grandeur of architecture and 
music prevent the adoration of God in the worship of a cathe- 
dral. Rather the varied forms of beauty, truth, and goodness 
displayed in the Bible will conspire to bring us to Him who is 
the centre and inspiration of them all. 

2. The Study of the Bible is obstructed by sectarian partisan- 
ship. A sin against the Bible is often committed by the indis- 
criminate use of proof texts in dogmatic assertion and debate. 
These texts are hurled against one another by zealous partisans 
in controversy with such differences and inconsistency of inter- 
pretation as to excite the disgust of all openminded persons. 
It has become a proverb that anything can be proved from the 
^Bible. Then again the Bible is too often used as a text-book 
of abstract definitions giving absolute truth. The Protestant 
Reformers threw aside the authority of the Church as the in- 

1 There are many sad instances of this misuse of the Bible. Doubtless there 
are cases in which there has apparently been good guidance, but there are others 
in which men and women have been misled to the ruin of themselves and other 
people. This method of resorting to a divine oracle is less likely to lead to faith 
and holiness than to disappointment, distrust of God, and eventual unbelief. 

2 See Chap. XVIII. p. 432, for this method of using the Old Testament. 



ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY 7 

fallible interpreter of the Bible and refused to submit to the 
interpretation of the Fathers of the Church as final. They 
asserted the right of private judgment for themselves and 
others. But their successors established a Protestant rule of 
faith which became as tyrannical over private judgment as 
Roman tradition had ever been. Over against these abuses, we 
maintain that the Bible was not made for ecclesiastical dogma- 
ticians and lawyers, but for the people of God. It gives the 
concrete in the forms and methods of literature. Its state- 
ments are ordinarily relative ; they depend upon the context in 
which they are imbedded, the scope of the author's argument, 
his peculiar point of view, his type of thought, his literary 
style, his position in the unfolding of divine revelation. There 
are occasional passages so pregnant with meaning that they 
seem to present, as it were, the quintessence of the whole 
Bible. Such texts were called by Luther little bibles. But 
ordinarily, the texts can be properly understood only in their 
context. To detach them from their place and use them as if 
they stood alone, and deduce from them all that the words and 
sentences may be constrained to give, as absolute statements, is 
an abuse of logic and the Bible. Such a use of other books 
would be open to the charge of misrepresentation. Such a 
use of the Bible is an adding unto the ¥/ord of God new mean- 
ings and a taking away from it the true meaning. Against 
this we are warned by the Bible itself. ^ Deduction, inference, 
and application may be used within due bounds, but they 
must always be based upon a correct apprehension of the 
text and context of the passage. These processes should be 
conducted with great caution, lest in transferring the thought 
to new conditions and circumstances, there be an insensible 
assimilation first of its form and then of its content to these 
conditions and circumstances, and it become so transformed 
as to lose its biblical character and become a tradition of man. 
It is a melancholy feature of Biblical Study that so much 
attention must be given to the removal of the rubbish of 
traditional misconceptions and misinterpretations that has been 
heaped upon the Word of God continually just as in the times 

1 Rev. 2218- 19. 



8 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of Jesus. The Bible is like an oasis in a desert. Eternal 
vigilance and unceasing activity are necessary to prevent the 
sands from encroaching upon it and overwhelming its fertile 
soil and springs of water. 

The Bible was given to us in the forms of the world's litera- 
ture, and its meaning is to be determined by the reader as he 
determines the meaning of other literature by the same princi- 
ples of exegesis. It is a Protestant principle that the Word 
of God should be given to the people in their own familiar 
tongue with the right of private judgment in its interpretation. 
It is a corollary of this principle that they be taught that 
it is to be understood in a natural sense, as other writings 
are understood. The right of private judgment is debased 
when partisanship determines that judgment and when secta- 
rianism perverts it. The Bible was not given to sustain the 
partisan or to uphold the sect ; but to teach the Truth of God 
and to guide in the holy life. The right of private judgment 
implies the right to seek the Truth in the Bible and the duty 
to teach that Truth without fear or favour. Any unnatural 
and artificial interpretation of the Bible bears its own condem- 
nation in itself. The saving truths of Scripture can be " sav- 
ingly understood " only through the illumination of the Spirit 
of God,i but this is not for the reason that they are not 
sufficiently plain and intelligible, or that some special princi- 
ples of interpretation are needed of a bibliolatrous, scholastic, 
or cabalistic sort ; it is owing to the fact that in order to 
salvation they must be applied to the soul of man by a divine 
agent, and appropriated by the faith of the heart and the 
practice of the life. 

3. The Study of the Bible has been greatly hindered by the 
use of it as an obstruction to progress in knowledge and in life. 
The craving for place and power is felt by self-willed men in 
all ages and in all callings. The Church has not been able to 
keep itself free from such ambitions. Ecclesiastical domina- 
tion is the worst kind of domination, because it is so contrary 
to the ideal of the Church and the example of Christ. And 
yet in every generation men arise who claim to be the cham- 

1 Westminster Confession, I. 0. See pp. 485 seq. 



ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY 9 

pions of orthodoxy and tlie guardians of ecclesiastical authority. 
They assert the authority of the Church and hold up texts from 
the Bible as the supreme test of every new thing that is pro- 
posed for the improvement of mankind. They presume to 
oppose the discoveries of science, the researches of philosophy, 
the unfolding of theology into fresher and better statements, 
the improvement of religious life and work, and even the 
deeper and more thorough study of the Bible, by holding 
up isolated texts and insisting on antiquated interpretations. 
Nearly every profound thinker, since the days of Socrates, has 
been obliged to pause in his work and defend himself, like 
the apostle Paul, against these "dogs" and "evil workers." ^ 
Galileo was silenced by the quoting of the Bible against the 
Copernican theory of the revolution of the earth around the sun.^ 
Descartes had to defend his orthodoxy. The enemies of the 
critical philosophy of Kant charged that no critic who fol- 
lowed out the consequences of his positions could be a good 
man, a good citizen, or a good Christian. ^ 

The results of Geology have been opposed by those who in- 
sist that the world was made in six days of twenty -four hours. 
Biology has to fight its wa-y against those who affirm that the 
doctrine of development is against the Scriptures. Such use 
of the Bible has too often the eifect of driving scholars away 
from it, and especially from the Old Testament, the most abused 
part of it.^ 

Every advance in the study of the Bible has been confronted 
by these enemies of the truth. The investigation of the Canon, 
Textual Criticism, the Higher Criticism, Historical Criticism, 
Biblical Theology, all these departments had to fight for exist- 

1 Phil. 32. 

2 White, History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. 
N. Y. 1896. Vol. I. pp. 130 seq. 

3 These points are discussed by Krug, Ueher das Verhdltniss der Kritischpii 
Philosophie zur moralischen, politischen und religidsen Kultur der 3Ienschen. 
Jena, 1798. 

* " The fact is therefore indisputable, that theologians have handled Scripture 
on such faulty principles, that they have laid down as truths indisputably divine 
a number of dogmas which have brought revelation into direct collision with 
some of the greatest discoveries of modern science, and that after having, on 
their first enunciation, denounced them as inconsistent with the belief that 
Scripture contains the record of a divine revelation, they have been compelled to 



10 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ence, and then, after they had won their right to exist, have 
the still more difficult battle to wage against those hypocritical 
and traitorous companions who make a show of using the prin- 
ciples and methods of the scientific study of the Bible, either 
for the purpose of discrediting them, or else as advocates and 
partisans of traditional and sectarian opinions. The history 
of all these combats is the same. The theological Bourbons 
never learn anything from past defeats. They repeat the same 
obstructive methods, and, when defeated, make the same insin- 
cere apologies. The race of time-servers continues to propa- 
gate itself from age to age. They always take the via media 
and lean to the traditional side. They always encourage the 
traditionalists, and obstruct faithful biblical scholars. And so 
the combat goes on.^ The Divine Spirit leads into all the truth 
in spite of every obstacle erected by Christian dogmaticians 
and ecclesiastical assemblies. The later theologians correct 
the earlier theologians, and later ecclesiastical assemblies al- 
ways eventually give their voice on the side of the Truth of 
God. 

But it is ever necessary for the friends of truth and of prog- 
accept them as unquestionable verities. Moreover, the general distrust arising 
from failures of this kind has been intensified by the pertinacity with which 
theologians have clung to various unsound positions which they have only 
abandoned when further resistance had become impossible. The history of the 
conflict between Science and Revelation is full of such instances, and the con- 
sequences have been disastrous in the extreme." — C. A. Row, Bevelation and 
Modern Theology Contrasted. London, 1883. p. 7. 

1 " The newer thought moved steadily on. As already in Protestant Europe, 
so now in the Protestant churches of America, it took strong hold on the fore- 
most minds in many of the churches known as orthodox : Toy, Briggs, Erancis 
Brown, Evans, Preserved Smith, Moore, Haupt, Harper, Peters, and Bacon de- 
veloped it, and, though most of them were opposed bitterly by synods, councils, 
and other authorities of their respective churches, they were manfully supported 
by the more intellectual clergy and laity. The greater universities of the coun- 
try ranged themselves on the side of these men ; persecution but intrenched 
them more firmly in the hearts of all intelligent well-wishers of Christianity. 
The triumphs won by their opponents in assemblies, synods, conventions, and 
conferences were really victories for the nominally defeated, since they revealed 
to the world the fact that in each of these bodies the strong and fruitful thought 
of the Church, the thought which alone can have any hold on the future, was 
with the new race of thinkers ; no theological triumphs more surely fatal to the 
victors have been won since the Vatican defeated Copernicus and Galileo." 
— White, History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, 
Vol. II. p. 370. 



ADVANTAGES OF THE STUDY 11 

ress in the Church to oppose and to overcome obstructionists. 
It is the duty of all lovers of the Bible to break up the super- 
stitions that cluster about it, to expose the false polemic use of 
its texts, to prevent dogmaticians from using it as an obstacle 
to progress in civilization, and to show that it favours all truth 
and every form of scholarly investigation. The Bible is an 
honest book in all its parts, — it is the Word of God, and every 
sincere disciple of wisdom will find in its pages not only the 
real and the highest truth, but will be stimulated and encour- 
aged to press forward under the guidance of the Holy Spirit 
unto all truth .^ 

The design of this book is to set forth the principles and 
methods of the Study of Holy Scripture, to describe its depart- 
ments, and to give sketches of their history. It is proposed, 
first of all, to survey the whole field, and then to examine in 
more detail the several departments. We shall aim to explain 
the true uses of the Bible and show throughout that Biblical 
Study is, as we have claimed, the most important, extensive, 
profound, and attractive of all studies. 

1 John 1613. 



CHAPTER II 

THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The general term for the various departments of the Study 
of Holy Scripture as given in most Theological Encyclopaedias 
is Exegetical Theology. Exegetical Theology is one of the 
four grand divisions of Theological Science. It is related to 
the other divisions, as the primary and fundamental discipline 
upon which they depend, and from which they derive their chief 
materials. Exegetical Theology is not an appropriate term for 
the study of the Bible, especially as that study is now under- 
stood. For the exegetical study of the Bible, although an im- 
portant section of Biblical Study, is far from being the whole 
of it. And the work of exegesis is just as important in the 
study of the sources of Church History, or the sources of any 
other study. No one can study the Bible thoroughly and com- 
pletely without the use of the historical method and without 
also the systematic organization of his material, and the prac- 
tical use of it. We shall use for our purpose, therefore, the 
simpler term Study of Holy Scripture. 

This study is limited to the Holy Scripture itself and to 
those auxiliary departments, which are in essential relation to 
it. It has to do with the Sacred Scriptures, their origin, his- 
tory, character, exposition, doctrines, and guidance in life. It 
is true that the other branches of theology have likewise to do 
with the sacred writings, in that their chief material is derived 
therefrom, but they differ from the study we now have in view, 
not only in their methods of using this material, but likewise 
in the fact, that they do not themselves search out and gather 
this material directly from the holy writings, but depend upon 
the more particular Study of Holy Scripture therefor. Church 

12 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 13 

History traces the development of that material as the deter- 
mining element in the history of the Church of God ; Dogmatic 
Theology arranges that material in the form most appropriate 
for systematic study, for attack and defence, in accordance Avith 
the needs of the age ; Practical Theology directs that material 
to the conversion of the people, and training them in the holy 
life. Thus the whole of theology depends upon the study 
of Holy Scripture, and unless this department be thoroughly 
wrought out and established, the whole theological structure 
will be weak and frail, and it will be found, in the critical 
hour, resting on the shifting sands of human opinion and prac- 
tice, rather than on the immovable rock of Divine Truth. 

The Study of Holy Scripture is all the more important, that 
each age has its own peculiar phase or department of truth 
to elaborate in the theological conception and in the life. 
Unless, therefore, theology freshens its life by ever-repeated 
draughts from Holy Scripture, it will be unequal to the tasks 
imposed upon it. It will not solve the problems of the 
thoughtful, dissolve the doubts of the cautious, or disarm the 
objections of the enemies of the truth. History will not do 
so with her experience, unless she grasp the torch of divine 
revelation, which alone can illuminate the future and clear up 
the dark places of the present and the past. Dogmatic The- 
ology will not satisfy the demands of the age if she ap^Dear 
in the worn-out armour or antiquated costume of former gen- 
erations. She must beat out for herself a new suit of armour 
from biblical material which is ever new ; she must weave to 
herself a fresh and sacred costume of doctrine from the Scrip- 
tures which never disappoint the requirements of mankind ; 
and thus armed and equipped with the weapons of the Living 
One, she will prove them quick and powerful, convincing and 
invincible, in her training of the disciple, and her conflicts with 
the infidel and heretic. And so Practical Theology will never 
be able to convert the world to Christ, and sanctify the Church, 
without ever renewing its life from the biblical fountain. The 
pure, noble, and soul-satisfying truths of God's Word must 
so pervade our liturgy, hymnology, catechetical instruction, 
pastoral work and preaching, as to supply the necessities of 



14 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the age, for " man shall not live by bread alone, but by every 
word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."^ 

The history of the Church, and Christian experience, have 
shown that in so far as the other branches of theology have 
separated themselves from this fundamental discipline, and in 
proportion to the neglect to study Holy Scripture, the Church 
has fallen into a dead orthodoxy of scholasticism, has lost its 
hold upon the masses of mankind, so that, with its foundations 
undermined, it has yielded but feeble resistance to the onsets 
of infidelity. And it has ever been that the reformation or 
revival has come through the resort to the sacred oracles, and 
the reorganization of a freshly stated body of doctrine, and 
fresh methods of evangelization derived therefrom. We thus 
have reason to thank God that heresy and unbelief so often 
drive us to our citadel, the Sacred Scriptures, and force us 
back to the impregnable fortress of Divine Truth, so that, 
depending no longer merely upon human weapons and defences, 
we may use rather the divine. Thus we reconquer all that 
may have been lost through the slackness and incompetence 
of those who have been more anxious for the old ways than 
for strength of position and solid truth, and by new enterprises 
we advance a stage onward in our victorious progress toward 
the End. Our adversaries may overthrow our systems of 
theology, our confessions and catechisms, our local church 
organizations and methods of work, for these are, after all, 
human productions, the hastily thrown up outworks of the 
truth ; but they can never contend successfully against the 
Word of God that liveth and abideth,^ which, though the heavens 
fall and the earth pass away, will not fail in one jot or tittle 
from the most complete fulfilment,^ which will shine in new 
beauty and glory as its parts are one by one searchingly ex- 
amined, and which will prove itself not only invincible, but 
all-conquering, as point after point is most hotly contested. 
We are assured that at last it will claim universal obedience as 
the pure and faultless mirror of Him who is Himself the efful- 
gence of the Father's glory and the very image of His substance.* 

1 Deut. 83 ; Mt. 44. 2 1 Pet. 123. s Mt. 5i8. 

* 2 Cor. 318 ; Heb. l^. See Briggs, Messiah of Apostles, p. 244. 



THE SCOPE OE THE STUDY 16 

It is an important characteristic of the Reformed churches 
that they give the Sacred Scriptures such a fundamental posi- 
tion in their confessions and catechisms, and lay so much stress 
upon the so-called /orma? principle of the Protestant Reforma- 
tion. Thus in both Helvetic confessions and in the Westmin- 
ster confession they constitute the first article, ^ while in the 
Heidelberg and Westminster catechisms they are placed at the 
foundation — in the former as the source of our knowledge of 
sin and misery and of salvation ; ^ in the latter, as dividing the 
catechism into two parts, teaching " what man is to believe con- 
cerning God, and what duty God requires of man " ; ^ and the 
English Articles of Religion lay down the principle of the An- 
glican Church that : " Holy Scripture containeth all things neces- 
sary to salvation : so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor 
may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that 
it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought 
requisite or necessary to salvation."* 

The Study of Holy Scripture being thus, according to its 
idea, the fundamental theological discipline, and all-important as 
the fruitful source of theology, it must be thoroughly elabora- 
ted in all its parts according to exact and well-defined scientific 
methods. The methods proper to the discipline are the syn- 
thetic and the historical, the relative importance of which is con- 
tested. The importance of the historical method is so great that 
not a few have regarded the discipline, as a whole, as at once a 
primary division of Historical Theology. The examination of the 
biblical sources, the Sacred Writings, being of the same essential 
character as the examination of other historical documents, they 
should be considered simply as the sources of Biblical History, 
and thus the writings themselves would be most appropriately 
treated under a history of Biblical Literature, and the doctrines 
under a history of Biblical Doctrine.^ But the sacred writings 
are not merely sources of historical information ; they are the 

1 Niemeyer, CoUectio Confess., pp. 115, 467 ; Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 
1877, III. pp. 211, 237. 2 Quest, iii. xix. 

^ Larger Catechism, Quest, v. ; Shorter Catechism, Quest, iii. * ^y^. VI. 

^ Compare the author's articles on Biblical Theology, American Presbyterian 
Review, 1870, pp. 122 seq., and Presbyterian Beview, July, 1882, pp. 503 seq., and 
Chap. XXIII. of this volume. 



16 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

sources of the Faith to be believed and the morals to be prac- 
tised by all the world ; they are of everlasting value as the sum 
total of sacred doctrine and teaching for mankind, being not 
only for the past, but for the present and the future, as God's 
Holy Word to the human race, so that their value as historical 
documents becomes entirely subordinate to their value as a 
canon of Holy Scripture, the norm and rule of faith and life. 
Hence the synthetic method must predominate over the histori- 
cal, as the proper exegetical method, and induction rule in all 
departments of the work ; for it is the office of our discipline to 
gather from these sacred writings, as the storehouse of Divine 
Truth, the holy material, in order to arrange it by a process of 
induction and generalization into the generic forms that may 
best express the conceptions of the Sacred Scriptures themselves. 
From this point of view it is clear that the analytic method 
can have but a very subordinate place in our branch of theology. 
It may be necessary in separating the material in the work of 
gathering it, but this is only in order to the synthetic process 
to which it leads and which must ever prevail. It is owing to 
the improper application of the analytic method to exegesis, 
that such sad mistakes have been made in interpreting the 
Word of God, making exegesis the slave of dogmatics and tra- 
dition, when she can only thrive as the free-born daughter of 
truth. Her word does not yield to dogmatics, and before her 
voice tradition must ever give way. For exegesis cannot go to 
the text with preconceived opinions and dogmatic views that 
will constrain the text to accord with them, but rather with a 
living faith in the perspicuity and power of the Word of God 
alone^ of itself to persuade and convince ; and with reverential 
fear of the voice of Him Avho speaks through it, which involves 
assurance of the truth, and submission and prompt obedience to 
His will. Thus, exegesis does not start from the unity to in- 
vestigate the variety, but from the variety to find the unity. It 
does not seek the author's view and the divine doctrine through 
an analysis of the writing, the chapter, the verse, down to the 
word ; but, inversely, it starts with the word and the clause, 
pursuing its way through the verse, paragraph, section, chapter, 
writing, collection of writings, the entire Bible, until the whole 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 17 

Word of God is displayed before the mind from the summit 
that has been attained after a long and arduous climbing. 

Thus the Study of Holy Scripture is altogether scientific : 
its premises and materials are no less clear and tangible than 
those with which any other science has to do, and its results 
are vastly more important than those of all other sciences com- 
bined, for they concern our salvation and everlasting welfare. 
Furthermore, this material, with Avhich we have to do, is the 
very Word of God to man, and we have a science that deals 
with immutable facts and infallible truths, so that our science 
takes its place in the circle of sciences, as the royal, yes, the 
divine science. But this position will be accorded it by the 
sciences only in so far as theology as a whole is true to the spirit 
and character of its fundamental discipline, and just so long as 
it is open-eyed for all truth, courts investigation and criticism 
of its own materials and methods, and does not assume a false 
position of dogmatism and traditional prejudice, or attempt to 
tyrannize over the other sciences or obstruct their earnest re- 
searches after the truth. 

The Study of Holy Scripture being thus fundamental and im- 
portant, having such thoroughgoing scientific methods, it must 
have manifold divisions and subdivisions of its work. These, 
in their order and mutual relation, are determined by a proper 
adjustment of its methods and the subordination of the histori- 
cal to the inductive process. Thus at the outset there are im- 
posed upon those who would enter upon the study of the Sacred 
Scriptures certain primary and fundamental questions respecting 
the holy writings, such as : Which are the sacred writings ? why 
do we call them sacred ? whence did they originate ? under what 
historical circumstances were they written? who were their 
authors ? to w^hom were they addressed ? what was their de- 
sign ? are the writings that have come down to us genuine ? is 
the text reliable ? These questions may be referred to the gen- 
eral department of Biblical Literature. Then the Scriptures are 
to be interpreted according to correct principles and methods, 
with all the light that the study of centuries throws upon them. 
This is Biblical Exegesis. Finally, the results of this exeget- 
ical process are to be gathered into organisms of Biblical His- 



18 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

tory and of Biblical Theology. These then are the four grand 
divisions into which our discipline naturally divides itself, each 
in turn having its appropriate subordinate departments. 

I. Biblical Literature 

Biblical Literature has as its work to determine all those 
introductory questions that may arise respecting the sacred 
writings, preliminary to the work of exegesis. These questions 
are various, yet may be grouped in accordance with a general 
principle. But it is, first of all, necessary to limit the bounds 
of our department and exclude from it all that does not properly 
come within its sphere. Thus Hagenbach ^ brings into consid- 
eration here certain questions which he assigns to the auxiliary 
disciplines of Sacred Philology, Sacred Archseology, and Sacred 
Canonics. But it is difficult to see why, if these are in any 
essential relation to our department, they should not be logi- 
cally incorporated, while if they do not stand in such close 
relations why they should not be referred to their own proper 
departments of study. Thus Sacred Canonics clearly belongs 
to our discipline, as a necessary part of Biblical Literature. ^ 
Sacred Archaeology belongs no less certainly to Biblical His- 
tory.2 Sacred Philology should not be classed with Theology 
at all ; for the languages of the Bible are not sacred from any 
inherent virtue in them, but only for the reason that they have 
been selected as the vehicle of divine revelation, and thus their 
connection with the Scriptures is providential rather than nec- 
essary. And still further, all departments of theology are in 
mutual relation to one another, and in a higher scale all the 
departments of learning — such as theology, philosophy, phi- 
lology, and history — act and react upon one another. Hence, 
that one department of study is related to another does not 
imply that it should be made auxiliary thereto. Thus the lan- 
guages of Scripture are to be studied precisely as the other lan- 
guages, as a part of General Philology. The Hellenistic Greek 
is a dialect of the Greek language, which is itself a prominent 
member of the Indo-Germanic family ; while the Hebrew and 
1 EnajklopMie, 9te Anfl., s. 40. 2 gee p. 21. 3 See p. 37. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 19 

Aramaic are sisters with the Assyrian and Syriac, the Arabic 
and Ethiopic, the Phoenician and Samaritan, of the Shemitic 
family. The study of these languages, as languages, properly 
belongs to the college or university course, and has no appro- 
priate place in the theological seminary. Valuable time is 
consumed in these preparatory studies that is taken from our 
study itself and never fully compensated for. One might as 
truly study general history in the theological course as a prep- 
aration for Church History, and philosophy as a preparation 
for Dogmatic Theology, and rhetoric as a preparation for Prac- 
tical Theology. All these alike are preparatory disciplines, 
belonging to the college and not to the theological school. 

The Shemitic languages are constantly rising into promi- 
nence, over against the Indo-Germanic family, and demand 
their appropriate place in the curriculum of a liberal education. 
Philologists and theologians should unitedly insist that a place 
should be found for them in the college course ; ^ and that this 
valuable department of knowledge, upon the pursuit of which 
so much depends for the history of the Orient, the origin of 
civilization and mankind, as well as for the whole subject of 
the three great religions of the world, should not be neglected 
in our institutions of learning. It should be made evident that 
philology, history, and philosophy are essential for those who 
are in their collegiate courses preparing for the Study of 
Theology. 2 

There can be no thorough mastery of the Hebrew tongue by 

1 German theology has a great advantage, in that the theological student is 
already prepared in the gymnasium for the university with a knowledge of 
Hebrew relatively equivalent to his Greek. The Presbyterians of Scotland 
require an elementary knowledge of Hebrew, in order to entrance upon the 
theological course. In the Roman theological training, the languages of the 
Bible belong to the introductory philosophical course, and are not included in 
the four years' course of theology proper. When my Biblical Study was issued, 
in 1883, no more than three or four American universities and colleges made 
provision for the study of the Hebrew language in their courses. In recent 
years great progress has been made. Almost all the large colleges and universi- 
ties have introduced the Shemitic languages as elective. And several theologi- 
cal schools have special classes for students who take entrance examinations in 
Hebrew. In Union Theological Seminary, New York, such classes for advanced 
students in Hebrew and Biblical Greek are in successful operation. 

2 See my article, "The Scope of Theology and its Place in the University," 
The American Journal of Theology, January, 1897. See also Chap. III. 



20 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

clinging reverently to the traditional methods of Hebrew study 
or those in use among Jews who learn to speak and write 
modern Hebrew. We might as well expect to master the 
classic Latin from the language of the monks, or classic Greek 
from modern Greece. The cognate languages are indispensa- 
ble. And it is just here that a rich treasure, prepared by 
Divine Providence for these times, is pouring into our laps. 
The Assyrian alone, as recently brought to light, and estab- 
lished in her position as one of the older sisters, is of inestima- 
ble value, not to speak of the Arabic and Syriac, the Ethiopic, 
Phoenician, Samaritan, and the lesser languages and dialects 
that the monuments are constantly revealing. Immense mate- 
rial is now at hand, and is still being gathered from these 
sources, that has considerably modified our views of the He- 
brew language, and of the history and religion of the Hebrews 
in relation to the other peoples of the Orient. We now know 
that the Hebrew language has such a thing as a syntax, and 
that it is a highly organized and wonderfully flexible and 
beautiful tongue, the result of centuries of development. As 
the bands of Rabbinical tradition are one after another falling 
off, the inner spirit and life of the language are disclosing 
themselves, the dry bones are clothing themselves with flesh, 
and rich, warm blood is animating the frame, giving to the 
features nobility and beauty.^ If the Church is to be renowned 
for its mastery of the Bible, if the symbols and the life of the 
Church are to harmonize, Christian theologians must advance 
and occupy this rich and fruitful field for the Lord, and not 

1 It is exceedingly gratifying that our American students are eagerly entering 
upon these studies. The large classes in the cognate languages, in our semina- 
ries, promise great things for the future in this regard. Twenty-five years ago, 
when I began teaching in Union Theological Seminary, New York, little atten- 
tion was given to the cognate languages. I organized a graded course in 
Biblical Aramaic, Syriac, and Arabic, to which Assyrian was soon added by 
Professor Francis Brown, Since then the study of the Shemitic languages has 
become common in most of our theological seminaries and universities. The 
leaders in this movement have been C. H. Toy, of Harvard ; W. R. Harper, 
formerly of Yale, now of Chicago ; J. P. Peters, formerly of Philadelphia ; and 
George Moore, of Andover. The classes in the Shemitic languages in our Ameri- 
can seminaries and universities average a larger number of students than those 
in the universities of Germany, and are greatly in excess of those in Great 
Britain. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 21 

abandon it to those whose interests are purely philological or 
historical. 

While, therefore, I exclude the study of the Hebrew and 
cognate languages from the proper range of the study of Holy 
Scripture, I magnify their importance, not only to the theologi- 
cal student, but also to the entire field of scholarship. Other 
scholars may do without them, but for the theologian these 
studies are indispensable, and he must at the very beginning 
strain all his energies to the mastery of the Hebrew tongue. 
If it has not been done before entering upon the study of the- 
ology, it must be done in the very beginnings of that study, 
or else he will be forever crippled. 

We now have to define more closely the proper field of Bibli- 
cal Literature. Biblical Literature has to do with all questions 
respecting the Sacred Scriptures that may be necessary to pre- 
pare the way for Biblical Exegesis. Looking at the Sacred 
Scriptures as the sources to be investigated, three fields of 
inquiry present themselves : the canon, the text, and the writ- 
ings. Three groups of questions arise : 1. As to the idea, 
extent, character, and authority of the canon., collected as the 
Sacred Scriptures of the Church. 2. As to the text of which the 
canon is composed, the manuscripts in which it is preserved, 
the translations of it, and the citations from it in ancient authors. 
3. As to the origin, authorship, time of composition, character, 
design, and destination of the writings that claim, or are 
claimed, to belong to the Sacred Scriptures. These subor- 
dinate branches of Biblical Literature may be called Biblical 
Canonics, the Lower or Textual Criticism, and the Higher 
Criticism. 

1. Biblical Canonics considers the canon of Holy Scripture 
as to its idea, its historical formation, its extent, character, 
authority, and historical influence. These inquiries are to be 
made in accordance with historical and synthetic methods. 
We are not to start with preconceived dogmatic views as to 
the idea of the canon, but derive this idea by induction from 
the Sacred Writings themselves. In the same manner we have 
to decide all other questions that may rise. Thus the extent 
of the canon is not to be determined by the consensus of the 



22 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Church,! or by the citation and reverent use of Scriptures in 
the Fathers, or by their recognition by the earliest standard 
authorities,^ for these historical evidences, so important in His- 
torical Theology, have no value in the Study of the Holy Scrip- 
ture. Canonicity is not rightly defined by the accord of a writ- 
ing with orthodoxy or the rule of faith,^ for such a test is too 
broad, in that other writings than sacred are orthodox, and 
again too narrow, in that the standard is the shifting one of 
subjective opinion, or external human authority, which, indeed, 
presupposes the canon itself as an object of criticism. Still 
less can we determine canonicity by apostolic or prophetic 
authorship. It is by no means certain that all prophetic and 
apostolic writings would be canonical even if they had been 
preserved. And it is in fact impossible to prove prophetic 
and apostolic authorship for the majority of the canonical writ- 
ings unless we use these terms so broadly as to give them no 
definite reference to any known prophets and apostles. Such 
external reasons, historical or dogmatic, may have a provi- 
sional and temporary authority ; but the one only permanent 
and final decision of these questions comes from the internal 
marks and characteristics of the Scriptures, their recognition 
of one another, their harmony with the idea, character, and 
development of a divine revelation, as it is derived from the 
Scriptures themselves, as well as from their own well-tested and 
critically examined claims to inspiration and authority, and, 
above all, from the divine authority speaking by and with 
them to the Church and the Christian. These reasons, and 
these alone, gave them their historical position and authority 
as a canon ; and these alone perpetuate their authority to 
every successive generation of Christians. It is only on this 
basis that the historical and dogmatic questions may be prop- 

1 Indeed, there is no consensus with reference to the extent of the canon 
whether it includes the Apocryphal books or not, and, still further, the opinions 
of recognized ancient authorities differ in the matter of distinguishing within the 
canon, between writings of primary and of secondary authority. 

2 These, indeed, are not entirely agreed, and if they were, they could only 
give us a human and fallible authority. 

3 It was in accordance with this subjective standard that Luther rejected the 
epistle of James and the book of Esther. Comp. Dorner, Gesch. der Protest. 
Theologie, 1868, s. 234 seq. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 23 

erly considered, with reference to their recognition by Jew and 
Christian, and with regard to their authority in the Church. 
The writings having been determined in their limits as a 
canon of Holy Scripture, we are prepared for the second step, 
the examination of the text itself. 

2. Textual Criticism considers the text of the Sacred Scrip- 
tures both as a whole and as to the several writings in detail. 
The Sacred Writings have shared the fate of all human pro- 
ductions in their transmission from hand to hand, and in the 
multiplication of copies. Hence, through the mistakes of copy- 
ists, the intentional corruption of the heretic, the supposed 
improvement of the over-anxious orthodox, and the efforts of 
Christian scribes to explain and to apply the sacred truth to 
the readers, the manuscripts which have been preserved betray 
differences of readings. This department has a wide field 
of investigation. First of all, the peculiarities of the Bible 
languages must be studied, and the idiomatic individualities 
of the respective authors. Then the age of the various manu- 
scripts must be determined, their peculiarities and relative 
importance in genealogical descent. The ancient versions 
come into the field, especially the Septuagint, the Aramaic and 
Samaritan Targum^s, the Syriac Peshitto, and the Latin Vul- 
gate. Each of these in turn has to go through the same sift- 
ing as to the critical value of its own text. Here, especially 
in the Old Testament, we go back of any surviving manu- 
scripts and are brought face to face with differences that can 
be accounted for only on the supposition of originals, whose 
peculiarities have been lost. To these may be added the cita- 
tions of the original text in the Fathers and the Talmud and 
in the numerous writings of Hebrew and Christian scholars. 
Then we have the still more difficult comparison of parallel 
passages, in the Sacred Scriptures themselves where differences 
of text show differences reaching far back of any known manu- 
script or version.^ Textual criticism has to meet all these 

1 Comp. Ps. 14 with Ps. 53 ; Ps. 18 with 2 Sam. 22 ; and the books of Samuel 
and Kings, on the one hand, with the books of the Chronicler on the other, and, 
indeed, throughout. Compare also the canonical books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and 
Daniel with the Apocryphal additions and supplements in the Septuagint ver- 



24 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

difficulties, answer all the questions which emerge, and har- 
monize and adjust all the differences, in order that, so far as 
possible, the genuine, original, pure, and uncorrupted text of 
the Word of God may be gained, as it proceeded directly 
from the original authors to the original readers. This depart- 
ment of study is all the more difficult for the Old Testament, 
that the field is so immense, the writings so numerous, various, 
and ancient, the languages so little understood in their histori- 
cal peculiarities, and, still further, in that we have to overcome 
the prejudices of the Massoretic system, which, while faithful 
and reliable so far as the knowledge of the times of the Masso- 
retes went, yet, as resting simply on tradition, without critical 
or historical investigation, and without any proper conception 
of the general principles of Hebrew grammar and compara- 
tive Shemitic philology, cannot be accepted as final; for the 
time has long since passed when the vowel points and accents 
of the Massoretic text can be deemed inspired. We have to 
go back of them, to the unpointed text, for all purposes of 
criticism. And the unpointed text itself needs correction in 
accordance with the rules of Textual Criticism. 

3. The Sigher Criticism is distinguished from the Lower or 
Textual Criticism by presupposing the text and dealing with 
individual writings and groups of writings. The Higher is 
contrasted with the Lower in this usage as the second or higher 
stage of a work is contrasted with the first or lower stage, or 
more fundamental part of a work.^ The parts of writings 
should be first investigated, the individual writings before the 
collected ones. With reference to each writing, or, it may be, 
part of a writing, we have to determine the historical origin 
and authorship, the original readers, the design and character 

sion, and finally the citation of earlier writings in the later ones, especially in 
the New Testament. An interesting and delicate work of criticism is to compare 
in the Gospels the different versions of the original Logia of Jesus. 

1 Some ignorant people in recent discussions seemed to think that Higher 
meant a pretentious and arrogant claim that this criticism was higher than the 
older traditional opinion. The newer criticism is doubtless vastly higher, 
nobler, and better in every way than the uncritical traditional method of hand- 
ling Biblical Literature ; but the term was not used historically with any such 
meaning and it never has had any such meaning in the minds of biblical 
scholars. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 25 

of the composition, and its relation to other writings of its 
group. These questions must be settled partly by external his- 
torical evidence, but chiefly by internal evidence, such as the 
language, style of composition, archaeological and historical 
traces, the conceptions of the author respecting the various 
subjects of human thought, and the like. With reference to 
such questions as these, we have little help from traditional views 
or dogmatic opinions which originally were mere conjectures 
or hastily formed opinions without sufficient consideration of 
the laws of evidence or the matter of the evidence itself. The 
antiquity of such conjectures does not enhance their value any 
more than it does other errors and mistakes. Whatever may 
have been the prevailing views in the Church with reference 
to the Pentateuch, the Psalter, or the Gospel of John, or any 
other book of Holy Scripture, these will not deter the conscien- 
tious exegete from accepting and teaching the results of a 
critical study of the Sacred Writings themselves. 

It is just here that Christian theologians have greatly injured 
the cause of the truth and the Bible by dogmatizing in a de- 
partment where it is least of all appropriate, and, indeed, to 
the highest degree improper ; as if our faith depended at all 
upon these traditional opinions respecting the Word of God. 
By their frequent and shameful defeats and routs tradition- 
alists bring disgrace not only upon themselves but upon the 
cause they misrepresent. They alarm weak but pious souls who 
have taken refuge in the fortress itself, and then prejudice the 
sincere inquirer against the Scriptures, as if these questions 
of the Higher Criticism were questions upon whose decision 
depended orthodoxy or piety, or allegiance to the Word of God 
or the symbols of the Church. The Westminster standards 
teach that " the Word of God is the only rule of faith and obedi- 
ence,"^ and that "the authority of the Holy Scripture for 
which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon 
the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God, the 
author thereof." ^ The other Protestant symbols are in accord 
with them. How unorthodox it is, therefore, to set up another 
rule of prevalent opinion as to questions of the Higher Criti- 

1 Larger Catechism^ Quest, iii. 2 Confess, of Faiths Chap. I. 4. 



26 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

cism and make it an obstacle and a stumbling-block to those 
who would accept the authority of the Word of God alone. 
So long as the Word of God is honoured, and its decisions re- 
garded as final, what matters it if a certain book be detached 
from the name of one holy man and ascribed to another, or 
classed among those with unknown authors ? Are the laws 
of the Pentateuch any less divine, if it should be proved that 
they are the product of the experience of God's people from 
Moses to Josiah?^ Is the Psalter to be esteemed any the less 
precious that the Psalms should be regarded as the product of 
many poets singing through many centuries the sacred melo- 
dies of God-fearing souls, responding from their hearts, as from 
a thousand-stringed lyre, to the touch of the Holy One of 
Israel ? Is the book of Job less majestic and sublime, as it 
stands before us in its solitariness, the noblest monument of 
sacred poetry, with unknown author, unknown birthplace, and 
from an unknown period of history ? Are the ethical teachings 
of the Proverbs, the Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes, any 
the less solemn and weighty, that they may not be the product 
of Solomon's wisdom, but of the refi.ection of many holy wise 
men of different epochs, gathered about Solomon as their head ? 
Is the epistle to the Hebrews any less valuable for its clear 
presentation of the fulfilment of the Old Testament priesthood 
and sacrifice in the work of Christ, that it must be detached 
from the name of Paul ? Let us not be so presumptuous, so 
irreverent to the Word of God, so unbelieving with reference 
to its inherent power of convincing and assuring the seekers 
for the truth, as to condemn any sincere and candid inquirer 
as a heretic or a rationalist, because he may differ from us on 
such questions as these ! The internal evidence must be 
decisive in all questions of Biblical Criticism, and the truth, 
whatever it may be, will be most in accordance with God's 
Word and for the glory of God and the interest of the Church. ^ 

1 British and Foreign Evang. Review, July, 1868, Art. " The Progress of 
Old Testament Studies." 

'^ The whole of this paragraph was written and delivered before the outbreak 
of the Professor W. Robertson Smith controversy in Scotland and the discussions 
respecting the Higher Criticism in the United States. I see no reason to change 
a single word of it. Those majorities of ignorant and bigoted men who rejected 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 27 

Thus Biblical Literature gives us all that can be learned 
respecting the canon of Holy Scripture, its text and the vari- 
ous writings ; and presents the Sacred Scriptures as the holy 
Word of God, all the errors and improvements of men having 
been eliminated, in a text, so far as possible, as it came from 
holy men who " spake being moved by the Holy Spirit," ^ so 
that we are brought into the closest possible relations with the 
living God through His Word, having in our hands the very 
form that contains the very substance of divine revelation ; so 
that with reverence and submission to His will we may enter 
upon the work of interpretation, confidently expecting to be 
assured of the truth in the work of Biblical Exegesis. 

II. Biblical Exegesis 

First of all we have to lay down certain general principles 
derived from the study of the Word of God, upon which this 
exegesis itself is to be conducted. These principles must be 
in accord with the proper methods of our discipline and the 
nature of the work to be done. The work of establishing 
these principles belongs to the introductory department of 
Biblical Hermeneutics. The Scriptures are human produc- 
tions, and yet truly divine. The}^ must be interpreted as 
other human writings, and yet their peculiarities and differ- 
ences from other human writings must be recognized,^ especially 
the supreme determining difference of their inspiration by the 
Spirit of God. In accordance with this principle they require 
not only a sympathy with the human element in the sound 
judgment and practical sense of the grammarian, the critical 
investigation of the historian, and the aesthetic taste of the man 
of letters ; but also a sympathy with the divine element, an 
inquiring, reverent spirit to be enlightened by the Spirit of 

the Higher Criticism in the Presbyterian General Assemblies of Scotland and 
America, have been already overvv^helmingly condemned by the subsequent 
action of the General Assembly of the Eree Church of Scotland ; and they will 
speedily be put to shame by a General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church 
in the United States of America. These controversies emphasize the importance 
and the correctness of the principles then stated. We shall come upon them 
again in Chap. VIL, which is devoted to the subject. 

1 2 Pet. 121. 2 Comp. Immer, Hermeneutik der N. T. s. 9. 



28 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

God, without which no exposition of the Scriptures as sacred, 
inspired writings is possible. It is this feature that distin- 
guishes the discipline from the other corresponding ones, as 
Sacred ITermeneutics. Thus we have to take into account the 
inspiration of the Scriptures, their harmony, their unity in 
variety, their sweet simplicity, and their sublime mystery ; 
and all this not to override the principles of grammar, logic, 
and rhetoric, but to supplement them ; yes, rather, infuse into 
them a new life and vigour, making them sacred grammar, 
sacred logic, and sacred rhetoric. And just here it is highly 
important that the history of exegesis should come into the field 
of study in order to show us the abuses of false principles of 
interpretation as a warning ; and the advantages of correct 
principles as an encouragement.^ 

After this preliminary labour, the exegete is prepared for his 
work in detail. The immensity of these details is at once 
overpowering and discouraging. The extent, the richness, 
the variety of the Sacred Writings, poetry, history, and proph- 
ecy, extending through so many centuries, and from such a 
great number of authors, known and unknown, the inherent 
difficulty of interpreting the sacred mysteries, the things of 
God — who is sufficient for these things ? who would venture 
upon this holy ground without a quick sense of his incapacity 
to grasp the divine ideas, and an absolute dependence upon the 
Holy Spirit to show them unto him?^ Truly, here is a work 
for multitudes, for ages, for the most profound and devout 
study of all mankind ; inasmuch as here we have to do with 
the whole Word of God to man. The exegete is like the 
miner. He must free himself as far as possible from all 
traditionalism and dogmatic prejudice, must leave the haunts 
of human opinion, and bury himself in the Word of God. He 
must descend beneath the surface of the Word into its depths. 
The letter must be broken through to get at the precious 
idea. The dry rubbish of misconception must be thrown out, 
and a shaft forced through every obstacle to get at the truth. 
And while faithful in the employment of all these powers of 

1 Comp. especially Diestel, Gesch. d. A. T. in der Christ. Kirche. Jena, 1869. 

2 John 1615. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 29 

the human intellect and will, the true exegete fears the Lord, 
and only thereby hopes for the revelation of wisdom through 
his intimacy with Him.^ 

1. The exegete begins his work with Grammatical Exegesis. 
Here he has to do with the form^ the dress of the revelation, 
which is not to be disregarded or undervalued, for it is the 
form in which God has chosen to convey His Truth, the dress 
in which alone we can approach her and know her. Hebrew 
grammar must therefore be mastered in its etymology and 
syntax, or grammatical exegesis will be impossible. Here 
patience, exactness, sound judgment, and keen discernment 
are required, for every word is to be examined by itself, ety- 
mologically and historically, not etymologically alone, for Greek 
and Hebrews roots have not infrequently been made to teach 
ver}^ false doctrines. It has been forgotten that a word is 
a living thing, and has, beside its root, the still more impor- 
tant stem, branches, and products — indeed, a history of mean- 
ings. The word is then to be considered in its syntactical 
relations in the clause, and thus step by step the grammatical 
sense is to be ascertained, the false interpretations eliminated, 
and the various possible meanings correctly presented and 
classified. Without this patient study of words and clauses 
no accurate translation is possible, no trustworthy exposition 
can be made.^ It is true that grammatical exegesis leaves us in 
doubt between many possible constructions of the sense, but 
these doubts will be solved as the work of exegesis goes on. 
On the other hand, it eliminates many views as ungrammatical 
which have been hastily formed, and effectually prevents that 
jumping at conclusions to which the indolent and impetuous 
are alike inclined. 

2. The second step in exegesis is Logical and Rhetorical 
Exegesis. The words and clauses must be interpreted in 
accordance with the context, the development of the author's 

1 Job 2828 ; Ps. 2514 ; Prov. 8i7 seq. 

2 Yes, we may say that no translation can be thoroughly understood after the 
generation in which it was made, without this resort to the original text, which 
alone can determine in many cases the meaning of the translators themselves, 
when we come upon obsolete terms, or words whose meanings have become 
modified or lost. 



30 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

thought and purpose ; and also in accordance with the prin- 
ciples of rhetoric, discriminating plain language from figura- 
tive, poetry from prose, history from prophecy, and the various 
kinds of history, poetry, and prophecy from each other. This 
is to be done not after an arbitrary manner, but in accordance 
with the general laws of logic and rhetoric that apply to all 
writings. While the use of figurative language has led the 
mystic and the dogmatist to employ the most arbitrary and 
senseless exegesis, yet the laws of logic and rhetoric, correctly 
applied to the text, will clip the wings of the fanciful, and de- 
stroy the assumptions of the dogmatist, and, still further, will 
serve to determine many questions that grammar alone cannot 
decide, and hence more narrowly define the meaning of the 
text. 

3. The third step in exegesis is Historical Exegesis. The 
author must be interpreted in accordance with his historical 
surroundings. We must apply to the text the knowledge of 
the author's times, derived from archaeology, geography, chro- 
nology, and general history. Thus only will we be able to 
enter upon the scenery of the text. It is not necessary to 
resort to the history of exegesis ; one's own observation is 
sufficient to show the absurdities and the outrageous errors 
into which a neglect of this principle leads many earnest but 
ignorant men. No one can present the Bible narrative in the 
dress of modern every-day life without making the story ridic- 
ulous. And it must be so from the very nature of the case. 
Historical circumstances are essential to the truthfulness and 
vividness of the narrative. Instead of our transporting Script- 
ure events to our scenery, we must transport ourselves to their 
scenery, if we would correctly understand them and realize 
them. If we wish to apply Scripture truth, we may, after hav- 
ing correctly apprehended it, eliminate it from its historical 
circumstances, and then give it a new and appropriate form for 
practical purposes ; but we can never interpret Scripture with- 
out historical exegesis ; for it serves to more narrowly define 
the meaning of the text, and to eliminate the unhistorical ma- 
terials from the results thus far attained in the exegetical 
process. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 31 

4. The fourth step in exegesis is Comparative Exegesis. The 
results already gained with reference to any particular pas- 
sage are to be compared with the results attained in a like 
manner in other similar passages of the same author, or other 
authors of the period, and in some cases from other periods of 
divine revelation. Thus, by a comparison of scripture with 
scripture, additional light will be thrown upon the passage, 
the true conception will be distinguished from the false, and 
the results attained adequately supported. 

5. The fifth step in exegesis may be called Literary Exegesis. 
Great light is thrown upon the text by the study of the views 
of those who, through the centuries, in many lands, and from 
the various points of view have studied the Scriptures. Here 
on this battle-ground of interpretation we see almost every 
view assailed and defended. Multitudes of opinions have been 
overthrown, never to reappear ; others are weak and tottering 
— comparatively few still maintain the field. It is among 
these latter that we must in the main find the true interpre- 
tation. This is the furnace into which the results thus far 
attained by the exegete must be thrown, that its fires may 
separate the dross and leave the pure gold thoroughly refined. 
Christian divines, Jewish rabbins, and even unbelieving writers 
have not studied the Word of God for so many centuries in 
vain. No true scholar can be so presumptuous as to neglect 
their labours. No interpreter can rightly claim originality or 
freshness of conception who has not familiarized himself with 
this mass of material that others have wrought out. On the 
other hand, it is the best check to presumption, to know that 
every view that is worth anything must pass through the fur- 
nace. Any exegete who would accomplish anything should 
know that he is to expose himself to the fire that centres 
upon any combatant that will enter upon this hotly contested 
field. From the study of the Scriptures he will come into 
contact with human views, traditional opinions, and dogmatic 
prejudices. On the one side these will severely criticise and 
overthrow many of his results ; on the other his faithful study 
of the Word of God will be a fresh test of the correctness of 
those human views that have hitherto prevailed. Thus, from 



32 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the acting and reacting influences of this conflict, the truth of 
God will maintain itself, and it alone will prevail. 

We have thus far described these various steps of exegesis, 
in order that a clear and definite conception may be formed of 
its field of work — not that they are ever to be represented by 
themselves in any commentary, or even carried on indepen- 
dently by the exegete himself, but they should be regarded as 
the component parts of any thorough exegetical process ; and 
although, as a rule, naught but the results are to be published, 
yet these results imply that no part of the process has been 
neglected, but that all have harmonized in them. 

In advancing now to the higher processes of exegesis, we 
observe a marked difference from the previous ones, in that 
those have to do with the entire text, these with only select 
portions of it. In these processes while results are to be 
attained which will be most profitable to the great masses of 
mankind, yet those incur the severest condemnation who, with- 
out having gone through these fundamental processes them- 
selves, either use the labours of the faithful exegete without 
acknowledgment, or else, accepting traditional views without 
examination, build on untested foundations. The Christian 
world does not need theological castles in the air constructed 
by dogmatic traditionalists, or theories of Christian life erected 
by narrow-minded enthusiasts, but a solid structure of divine 
truth built by Christian scholars on the solid courses of biblical 
study as the temple of Divine Wisdom, the home of the soul, 
and a sure stronghold for living and dying. 

6. The sixth step in exegesis is Doctrinal Exegesis^ which 
considers the material thus far gathered in order to derive 
therefrom the ideas of the author respecting religion, faith, and 
morals. These ideas are then to be considered in their relation 
to each other in the section and chapter of the Sacred Writing. 
Thus we get the doctrine that the author would teach, and are 
prepared for a comparison of it with the doctrines of other 
passages and authors. Here we have to contend with a false 
method of searching for the so-called spiritual sense^ as if the 
doctrine could be independent of the form in which it is re- 
vealed, or, indeed, so loosely attached to it, that the grammar 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 33 

and logic should teach one thing, and the spiritual sense 
another. There can be no spiritual sense that does not accord 
with the results thus far attained in the exegetical process. 
The true spiritual sense comes before the inquiring soul as the 
product of the true exegetical methods that have been de- 
scribed. As the differences of material become manifest in 
the handling of it, the doctrine stands forth as divine and 
infallible in its own light. Any other spiritual sense is false 
to the Word of God, w^hether it be the conceit of Jewish caba- 
lists or Christian mystics. 

7. The seventh and final effort of exegesis is Practical 
Exegesis^ the application of the text to the faith and life of 
the present. And here we must eliminate not only the tempo- 
ral bearings from the eternal, but also those elements that 
apply to other persons and circumstances than those in hand. 
Everything depends upon the character of the work, whether 
it be catechetical, homiletical, evangelistic, or pastoral. All 
Scripture may be said to be practical for some purpose, but not 
every Scripture for every purpose. Hence, practical exegesis 
must not only give the true meaning of the text, but also the 
true application of the text to the matter in hand. Here we 
have to deal with a false method of seeking edification and de- 
riving pious reflections from every passage of Holy Scripture 
without regard to the time, the place, or the persons to whom 
it was written. This method of constraining the text to mean- 
ings that it cannot bear, does violence to the Word of God, 
which is not only not to be added to or taken from as a whole, 
but also as to all its parts. This spirit of interpretation, while 
nominally most reverential, is really very irreverential. It 
originates from a lack of knowledge of the Scriptures, and the 
neglect to use the proper methods of exegesis. It is born of 
the presumption that the Holy Spirit will reveal the sacred 
mysteries of religion to the indolent, if only he is sufficiently 
pious. He may indeed hide the truth from the irreverent 
critic, but He will not reveal it except to those who not only 
have piety, but who also search for it as for hidden treasures. 
This indolence and presumptuous reliance upon the Holy 
Spirit, which too often proves to be a dependence upon one's 



34 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

own conceits, fancies, and self-will, has brought disgrace upon 
the Word of God, as if it could be manifold in sense, or were 
able to prove anything that might be asked of it. Nay, still 
worse, it leads the preacher to burden his discourse with mate- 
rial which, however good it may be in itself, not only has no 
connection with the text, but no practical application to the 
circumstances of the hour, or the needs of his people. Over 
against this abuse of the Scriptures, the exegete learns to use 
it properly, and while he cannot find everywhere what he needs, 
yet he may find, by searching for it, far more and better than 
he needs ; yes, he learns, as he studies the Word of God, that 
it needs no forcing, but that it aptly and exactly satisfies with 
appropriate material every phase of Christian experience, gently 
clears away every shadow of difiiculty that may disturb the 
inquiring spirit, proving itself sufficient for each and every one, 
and ample for all mankind. 

We have endeavoured to consider the various processes of 
exegesis by which results are attained of essential importance 
to all the other departments of theology. The work of the 
exegete is foundation work. It is the work of the study, and 
not of the pulpit, or the platform. It brings forth treasures 
new and old from the Word of God, to enrich the more promi- 
nent and public branches of theology. It finds the nugget of 
gold that they are to coin into the current conceptions of the 
times. It brings forth ore that they are to work into the ves- 
sels or ornaments, that may minister comfort to the household 
and adorn the home and the person. It gains the precious 
gems that are to be set by these jewellers, in order that their 
lustre and beauty may become manifest and admired of all. 
Some think it strange that the Word of God does not at once 
reveal a system of theology^ or give us a confession of faith^ or 
catechism^ or liturgy. But Holy Scripture withheld these with 
beneficent purpose. ^ 

1 " Since no one of the first promulgators of Christianity did that which they 
must, some of them at least, haye been naturalltj led to do, it follows that they 
must have been supernaturaUy withheld from it. . . . Each Church, there- 
fore, was left through the wise foresight of Him who alone ' knew what is in 
man,' to provide for its own wants as they should arise ; — to steer its own 
course by the chart and compass which His holy Word supplies, regulating for 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 35 

For experience shows us that no body of divinity can answer 
for more than its generation. Every catechism and confession 
of faith will in time become obsolete and powerless. Liturgies 
are more persistent, but even these are changed and adapted 
in the process of their use by successive generations. All these 
symbols of Christian Worship and Christian Truth remain as 
historical monuments and symbols, as the worn and tattered 
banners that our veterans or honoured sires have carried victo- 
riously through the campaigns of the past ; but they are not 
suited entirely for their descendants. Each age has its own 
peculiar work and needs, and it is not too much to say, that 
not even the Bible could devote itself to the entire satisfaction 
of the wants of any particular age, without thereby sacrificing 
its value as the book of all ages. It is sufficient that the Bible 
gives us the material for all ages, and leaves to man the noble 
task of shaping that material so as to suit the wants of his own 
time. The Word of God is given to us in" the Bible, as His 
truth is displayed in physical nature, in an immense and varied 
storehouse of material. We must search the Bible in order 
to find what we require for our soul's food, not expecting to 
employ the whole, but recognizing that as there is enough for 
us, so there is sufficient for all mankind and for all ages. Its 
diversities are appropriate to the various types of human char- 
acter, the various phases of human experience ; and no race, 
no generation, no man, woman, or child, need fail in finding in 
the Scriptures the true soul-food, for it has material of abound- 
ing wealth, surpassing all the powers of human thought and 
all the requirements of human life. 

III. Biblical History 

The work of the study of Holy Scripture does not end with 
the work of Biblical Exegesis, but advances to higher stages in 
Biblical History and Biblical Theology. In the department of 
Biblical Exegesis our discipline produces the material to be 
used in the other departments of theology, but it also has as its 

itself the sails and rudder according to the winds and currents it may meet with." 
— See Whately, Essays on Some of the Peculiarities of the Christian Beligion. 
Fifth edition, London, 1846. Essay vi. pp. 349, 355. 



36 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

own highest problem, to make a thorough arrangement of that 
material in accordance with its own synthetic method in its 
own departments. As there is a history in the Bible, an un- 
folding of divine revelation, a unity and a wonderful variety ; 
so our study of Holy Scripture cannot stop until it has arranged 
the biblical material in accordance with its historical position, 
and its relative value in the one structure of divine revelation. 
And here, first, we have to consider the field of Biblical 
History. 

It has been the custom in many theological schools to treat 
Biblical History under the head of Church History. This cus- 
tom is based on a theory that the Christian Church embraces the 
whole historical life of the people of God, which ignores the dif- 
ferences between the Old Testament and the New Testament.^ 
Many theologians treat Biblical History as a section of Histori- 
cal Theology and exclude it from Exegetical Theology. ^ But 
the line separating Exegetical Theology from Historical Theol- 
ogy is not a line that divides between Exegesis and History ; for 
Historical Theology cannot get on without an exegesis of the 
sources of Church History, and if Exegesis is to determine what 
is to belong to Exegetical Theology, then Christian Archaeology, 
Patristics, Christian Epigraphy and Diplomatics should all go 
to Exegetical Theology as truly as Biblical History to Histori- 
cal Theology. But in fact the adjectives Exegetical and His- 

1 The Church of Christ did not exist, in fact, before the day of Pentecost. 
The people of God during the Old Testament dispensation were in the kingdom 
of God as established at Mount Horeb by the Old Covenant, and there was an 
Old Testament congregation, a Church of Yahweh ; but the Church of Christ 
came into being first with the establishment of the New Covenant and the gift 
of the Holy Spirit by the enthroned Messiah. See Briggs, Messiah of the 
Apostles, pp. 21 seq. There is a continuity between the Old Testament institu- 
tion and the New, but the differences of dispensations should not be ignored. 

2 So Hagenbach {EncyklopoMe, 11 Aufl., 1884, 8. 219 seq.). He regards Bib- 
lical History as the transition from Exegetical to Historical Theology. But he 
makes Biblical Archfeology to include Biblical Geography and Natural History, 
and classes it under Exegetical Theology. This distribution of the material is 
without sufficient reason, and is inconsistent. Heinrici (Theologische Encyklo- 
padie, 1893, s. 25 seq.) makes the Biblical Discipline and Church History the two 
parts of Historical Theology, and classifies Biblical History and Biblical Archae- 
ology with the Biblical Discipline. Cave (Introduction to TJieology, 2d edition, 
1896) uses Biblical Theology as the general title for all biblical studies, and 
includes Biblical History and Biblical Archaeology among them. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 37 

torical do not adequately discriminate the departments. Hence 
the tendency among many scholars to use Historical Theology 
as the general term to cover both the Bible and the Church. 
There is at present no consensus among scholars as to the best 
terms to be used for the several departments ; but there is a 
general agreement among more recent students that Biblical 
History and all related subjects must be classed with the bibli- 
cal studies whatever term may be used as a general title of these 
studies.^ 

Under the general head of Biblical History we have first to 
consider Historical Criticism, the proper method of testing and 
verifying the material of Biblical History. We have next to 
study the auxiliary disciplines of Biblical History, namely : Bib- 
lical Archaeology, Biblical Geography, Biblical Chronology, and 
the Natural History of the Bible. Most writers include all these, 
except Biblical Chronology, under the general head of Biblical 
Archseology, but without sufficient reasons.^ 

The third section of Biblical History will present the history 
of the people of God as contained in the Bible. And here we 
must distinguish Biblical History as a biblical discipline from 
the History of Israel as a section of universal history. The 
methods of dealing with the history contained in the Bible 
from those two different points of view is very great, and they 
cannot be confused without detriment to both departments. 
Biblical History limits itself strictly to the biblical material 
and uses the whole of that material from the biblical point of 
view. Whereas General History uses so much of the biblical 
material as suits its purpose, and organizes it, with all other 
material it can obtain, from the point of view of the general 
history of the world. It is also necessary to distinguish Bibli- 
cal History from the recent discipline entitled Contemporary 
History of the Bible. This discipline sets the biblical material 
in the light of material gathered from all other sources. Inas- 
much as it uses all the biblical material and gathers all other 
material in the interest of the study of the Bible, it should be 

1 See my article in the American Journal of Theology, January, 1897. 

2 So Hagenbach, Z.c, Heinrici, Z.c, and especially Benzinger, Hehr. Arclid- 
olorjie, 1894. See Chap, XXII. pp. 533 seq. 



38 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 

regarded as a section of Biblical History and the Study of Holy 
Scripture. It may be questioned, however, whether this dis- 
cipline is more closely related to Biblical Archseology or to 
Biblical History proper. That depends in great measure upon 
the method and scope of the treatment. The discipline has not 
yet been sufficiently matured to decide this question. ^ 

Biblical History sums up the great events, institutions, and 
heroic leaders in their historical origin and development. The 
divine, vital, and immediate presence determines the course of 
that history, and theophanic manifestations mark its great 
epochs. The Old Testament history unfolds through the 
centuries until it culminates in the New Testament history in 
the advent of Jesus, the Messiah and Saviour of mankind, and 
in His life, death, resurrection, and enthronement upon His 
heavenly throne as the sovereign Lord of His Church and of 
the world, and the founding of His Church through the apos- 
tles and prophets, commissioned by the Lord Himself. 

ly. Biblical Theology 

The Study of Holy Scripture culminates in Biblical Theol- 
ogy : all its departments pour their treasures into this basin, 
where they flow together and become compacted into one 
organic whole. For Biblical Theology rises from the exegesis 
of verses, sections, and chapters, to the higher exegesis of writ- 
ings, authors, periods, and of the Old and New Testaments as 
wholes, until the Bible is discerned as an organism, complete 
and symmetrical, one as God is one, and yet as various as man- 
kind is various, and thus only divino-human as the complete 
revelation of the God-man. 

In this respect Biblical Theology demands its place in theo- 
logical study as the highest attainment of exegesis. It is 
true that it has been claimed that the history of Biblical Doc- 
trine, as a subordinate branch of Historical Theology, fully 
answers its purpose ; and again, that Biblical Dogmatics, as the 
fundamental part of Systematic Theology, covers its ground. 
These branches of the sister grand divisions of theology deal 
1 See Chap. XXIL pp. 544 seq. 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 39 

with many of its questions and handle much of its material, 
for the reason that Biblical Theology is the highest point of 
exegesis where the most suitable transition is made to the 
other departments ; but it does not, it cannot belong to either 
of them. As Biblical Theology was not the product of His- 
torical or Systematic Theology, but was born in the throes 
of the exegetical process of the last century, so it is the child 
of exegesis, and can flourish only in its own home. The idea, 
methods, aims, and indeed, results, are entirely different from 
those of Church History or Dogmatic Theology. It does not 
give us a history of doctrine, although it uses the historical 
method in the unfolding of the doctrine. It does not seek the 
history of the doctrine, but the formation, the organization of 
the doctrine in history. It does not aim to present the system 
of Biblical Dogma, and arrange biblical doctrine in the form 
that Dogmatic Theology would have assumed even in Biblical 
Times ; but in accordance with its synthetic method of seeking 
the unity in the variety it endeavours to show the biblical order 
of doctrine, the form assumed by theology in the Bible itself, 
the organization of the doctrines of faith and morals in the 
historical divine revelation. It thus considers the doctrine 
at its first historical appearance, examines its formation and 
its relation to others in the structure, then traces its unfolding 
in history, sees it evolving by its own inherent vitality, as well 
as receiving constant accretions, ever assuming fuller, richer, 
grander proportions, until in the revelation of the New Testa- 
ment the organization has become complete and finished so 
far as the Bible itself is concerned. It thus not only dis- 
tinguishes a theology of periods, but a theology of authors and 
writings, and shows how they harmonize in the one complete 
revelation of God.^ Biblical Theology is not the ideal name 
for this discipline, but it is the name that has been historically 
associated with it, and it is improbable that it will ever be dis- 
placed. But Theology in Biblical Theology is used in an 
intermediate sense, — not so broadly as to cover the whole 

1 See author's articles on Biblical Theology, in American Presbyterian Be- 
view, 1870, and in the Presbyterian Beview, 1882, and Chap. XL of Briggs, 
Biblical Study, and Chap. XXIII. of this volume. 



40 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

field of theology in the Bible, for then it would be another 
name for Biblical Study itself ; and not so narrowly as to 
embrace only doctrines of faith, for it comprehends three great 
divisions : 1. Biblical Religion^ dealing with the facts and insti- 
tutions of religion ; 2. Biblical Doctrines^ which are the objects 
of faith ; and 3. Biblical Ethics^ the principles and laws of 
biblical morals and their historical evolution in holy conduct. 
From this comprehensive and elevated point of view of Bibli- 
cal Theology many important questions may be settled, such 
as the Relation of the Old Testament to the New Testament 
— a fundamental question for all departments of theology. It 
is only when we recognize that the New Testament is not only 
the historical fulfilment of the Old Testament, but also is its 
exegetical completion, that the unity and the harmony, all the 
grander for the variety and the diversity of the Scriptures, 
become evident. It is only from this point of view that the 
apparently contradictory views, as, for instance, of Paul and 
James, in the article of justification, and of the synoptic 
gospels and the gospel of John in their conceptions of the 
teaching of Christ, may be reconciled in their difference of 
types. It is only here that a true doctrine of inspiration can 
be attained, properly distinguishing the divine and human 
elements, and yet recognizing them in their union. It is only 
thereby that the Aveight of authority of the Scripture can be 
fully felt, and the consistency of the infallible canon invincibly 
maintained. It is only in this culminating work that the 
preliminary processes of exegesis are delivered from all the 
imperfections and errors that still cling to the most faithful 
work of the exegete. It is only from the hands of Biblical 
Theology that Church History receives its true keys. Dogmatic 
Theology its indestructible pillars, and Practical Theology its 
all-conquering weapons. 

Thus the Study of Holy Scripture is a theological discipline, 
which, in its various departments, presents an inexhaustible 
field of labour, where the most ambitious may work with a sure 
prospect of success, and where the faithful disciple of the Lord 
may rejoice in the most intimate fellowship with the Master, 



THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY 41 

divine truths being received immediately from His holy and 
loving hand, old truths being illuminated with fresh meaning, 
new truths filling the soul with indescribable delight. The 
Bible is not a field whose treasures have been exhausted, for 
they are inexhaustible. As in the past, holy men have found 
among these treasures jewels of priceless value ; as Athanasius, 
Augustine, Anselm, Luther, and Calvin, have derived there- 
from new doctrines that have given shape not only to the 
Church, but to the world ; so it is not too much to expect that 
even greater saints than these may yet go forth from their 
retirement, where they have been alone in communion with 
God through His Word, holding up before the world some new 
doctrine, freshly derived from the ancient writings, which, 
although hitherto overlooked, will prove to be the necessary 
complement of all the previous knowledge of the Church, no 
less essential to its life, growth, and progress than the Athana- 
sian doctrine of the Trinity, the Augustinian doctrine of sin, 
and the Lutheran doctrine of justification through faith. A 
scientific biblical study under the guidance of the Holy Spirit 
will ere long remove the clouds of prejudice and bigotry which 
envelop the battle of the sects and enable all men to see the 
Truth, the entire Truth of God, in all its wondrous simplicity, 
beauty, grandeur, and glory. Biblical science in its warfare 
with error and bigotry uses smokeless powder, and all its aims 
and their results are in the clear light of heaven and open to 
the vision of the entire world. 



CHAPTER III 

THE LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The languages of the Bible were prepared by Divine Provi- 
dence as the most suitable ones for declaring the divine revela- 
tion to mankind. Belonging, as they do, to the two great 
families of speech, the Shemitic and the Indo- Germanic, which 
have been the bearers of civilization, culture, and the noblest 
products of human thought and emotion, they are themselves 
the highest and most perfect developments of those families ; 
presenting, it is true, their contrasted features, but yet com- 
bining in a higher unity, in order to give us the complete divine 
revelation. Having accomplished this, their highest purpose, 
they soon afterward became stereotyped in form, or, as they 
are commonly called, dead languages; so that henceforth all 
successive generations, and indeed all the families of earth, 
might resort to them and find the common, divine revelation in 
the same fixed and unalterable forms. 

Language is the product of the human soul, as are thought 
and emotion, and therefore it depends upon the nature of that 
soul, the historical experiences of the family or race giving 
birth to it, and especially upon the stage of development in 
civilization, religion, and morals that may have been attained. 
The connection between language and thought is not loose, but 
is an essential connection. Language is not merely a dress that 
thought may put on or off at its pleasure ; it is the body of 
which thought is the soul ; it is the flesh and rounded form of 
which thought is the life and emotion the energy. Hence it is 
that language is moulded by thought and emotion, by experi- 
ence and culture ; it is, as it were, the speaking face of the race 
employing it, and it becomes the historical body in which the 

42 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 43 

experience of that race is organized. In many nations which 
have perished, and whose early history is lost in primeval dark- 
ness, their language gives us the key to their history and expe- 
rience as truly as the Parthenon tells us of the Greek mind, and 
the Pyramids display Egyptian culture. 

It is not a matter of indifference, therefore, as to the lan- 
guages that were to bear the divine revelation ; for, although 
the divine revelation was designed for all races, and may be 
conveyed in all the languages of earth, yet, inasmuch as it was 
delivered in advancing historical development, certain particular 
languages had to be employed as most suitable for the purpose, 
and indeed those which could best become the streams for en- 
riching the various languages of the earth. There are no lan- 
guages, not even the English and the German, which have 
drunk deepest from the classic springs of the Hebrew and the 
Greek, — there are no languages which could so adequately 
convey the divine revelation in its simplicity, grandeur, fulness, 
variety, energy, and impressiveness as those selected by Divine 
Providence for the purpose. 

Hence it is that no translation can ever take the place of the 
original Scriptures ; for a translation is, at the best, the work 
of more or less learned men, who, though they may be holy and 
faithful, and may also be guided by the Spirit of God, are yet 
unable to do more than give us their own interpretation of the 
Sacred Writings. If they are to make the translation accurate 
and thorough and adequate to convey the original meaning, they 
must enter into the very spirit and atmosphere of the original 
text ; they must think and feel with the original authors ; their 
hearts must throb with the same emotion; their minds must 
move in the same lines of thinking ; they must adapt them- 
selves to the numerous types of character coming from various 
and widely different periods of divine revelation, in order to 
correctly apprehend the thought and make it their own, and 
then reproduce it in a foreign tongue. A mere external, gram- 
matical, and lexicographical translation is inadequate for the 
purpose. Unless the spirit of the original has been not only 
apprehended, but conveyed, it is no real translation. All-sided 
men are necessary for this work, or at least a body of men 



44 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

representing the various types and phases of human experience 
and character. But even when such have been found and they 
have done their best, they have only partially fulfilled their task, 
for their translation only expresses their religious, ethical, and 
practical conceptions which at the utmost are those of the holi- 
est and most learned men of the particular age in which they 
live. But inasmuch as the divine revelation was given throuofh 
holy men who spake not only from their own time and for their 
own time, but from and for the timeless Spirit, the eternal ideas 
for all time, the advancing generations will ever need to under- 
stand the Word of God better than their fathers, and must, if 
they are faithful, continually improve in their knowledge of 
the original Scriptures, in their power of apprehending them, 
of appropriating them, and of reproducing them in speech and 
life. 

How important it is, therefore, if the Church is to maintain 
a living connection with the Sacred Scriptures, and enter ever 
deeper into their spirit and hidden life, that it should encour- 
age a considerable portion of its youth to pursue these funda- 
mental studies. At all events, the Church should ever insist 
that its ministry, who are to train God's people in the things 
of God, should have not merely a superficial knowledge of the 
Bible, such as any layman may readily attain, but should enjoy 
a deep and thorough acquaintance with the original perennial 
fountains of truth. History has already sufficiently shown that 
when this is neglected, the versions assume the place of the 
original Divine Word ; and the interpretations of a particular 
generation become the stereotyped dogmas of many genera- 
tions. When the life of a Christian people is cut off from its 
primary source of spiritual growth, a barren scholasticism, with 
its mechanical institutions, and perfunctory liturgies and cere- 
monies assume the place and importance of the Divine Word 
and living communion with God. 

The languages of the Bible being the only adequate means 
of conveying and perpetuating the divine revelation, it is im- 
portant that we should learn them not merely from the out- 
side, with grammar and lexicon, but also from the inside, with 
a proper conception of the genius and life of these tongues as 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 45 

employed by the ancient saints, and especially of the historical 
genius of the languages as the sacred channels of the Spirit's 
thought and life. Language is a living thing, and has its 
birth, its growth, its maturity, and often also its decline and 
its death. Language is born, not as a system of roots or 
detached words, that gradually come together by natural selec- 
tion into sentences. As plants may grow from roots after 
they have been cut down, but do not have their birth in roots, 
but in the seed-germs which contain the plants in embryo ; so 
language, although it may be analyzed into roots, yet was not 
born in roots and never existed in roots, but came into being 
as sentences,! as thought is ever a sentence, and not a word. 
Then as the mind develops, thought is developed with its body, 
language, and the language grows with the culture of a people. 
All languages that have literary documents may be traced in 
their historical development. Especially is this the case with 
the languages of the Bible; they have a long history back of 
them; centuries of literary development were required to pro- 
duce them. 

I. The Shemitic Family of Languages 

The Hebrew language was long supposed to be the original 
language of mankind ; but this view can no longer be held by 
philologists, for the Hebrew language, as it appears to us in 
its earliest forms in the Sacred Scriptures, bears upon its face 
the traces of a long previous literary development. ^ This is 
confirmed by comparing it with the other languages of the 
same family. 

The Shemitic family may be divided into four groups : ^ 
(1) the Southern or Arabic, (2) the Eastern or Assyrian, (3) the 
Western or Hebrew, (4) the Northern or Aramaic. 

1 Sayce, Principles of Comp. Philology, pp. 136 seq., 2d ed., London, 1875. 

2 Ewald, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, 3te Ausg. ; Gott. 1864, s. 78 seq. ; Ewald, 
Ausf. Lehrb. des Heb. Sprache, 7te Ausg. ; Gott. 1863, s. 23. 

3 Zimmern ( Vergleichende Grammatik, 1898) makes five groups by separat- 
ing the Ethiopic from the Arabic ; but he recognizes the propriety of classing 
these together as Southern Shemitic, and he does not give sufficient reasons for 
the exaltation of the Ethiopic into a special group. 



46 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

1. The Arabic group of Shemitic languages presents us one 
of the most primitive families of human speech. The Arabic 
language itself is spoken by many millions of our race at the 
present time. It is the richest of the Shemitic tongues in 
etymology, syntax, and literature. It has absorbed valuable 
material from many other languages, but it has transformed 
these foreign elements by its own genius. It is a living tongue 
whose life is longer than that of any other known to history. 
It is the richest of languages in its vocabulary and one of the 
wealthiest in the variety and extent of its literature. It is as 
fresh and vigorous as ever, with its wonderful power of en- 
riching itself by new formations and adaptations from other 
tongues. It is to be ranked with the greatest languages such 
as the Greek and the German. The Koran, the holy book 
of the Mahometans, of the seventh century of our era, is the 
classic model which has kept the language to its historic mould. 
Modern Arabic has approached very nearly the stage of lin- 
guistic development of the classic Hebrew of the Bible. Modern 
Arabic is nearer the classic Hebrew than is the Hebrew of 
the Mishna.i The Ethiopic language is a southern Arabic 
spoken in ancient Abyssinia. The oldest forms of the Shemitic 
family are often found in it. Its verbal system is the most 
elaborate of all. The chief literature is Christian, including 
translations of the Scriptures, many ancient liturgies and 
pseudepigraphical writings, the most important of which are 
the Book of Enoch and the Ascension of Isaiah. A modern 
variety of the Ethiopic is found in the Amharic.^ 

The Sabean or Himyaric is preserved only in inscriptions 
from the southern part of Arabia extending from the Persian 
Gulf to the Red Sea. It is often helpful in explaining archaic 
forms and by presenting intermediate stages and missing links 
in the development of Shemitic forms of etymology and syntax.^ 

1 Caspari, A Grammar of the Arabic Language, translated and edited by 
Wm. Wright ; 3d ed. by W. R. Smith and de Goeje, Cambridge, 1896 : Socin, 
Arabische Grammatik, 3 Aufl., Berlin, 1894; English 2d ed.. New York, 1885: 
Lane, Arabic Lexicon, London, 1863-1889. 

2 Dillmann, GrammatiJc der Aethiopischen Sprache, Leipzig, 1857 ; Chresto- 
mathia Aethiopica, 1866 ; Lexicon Lingua JEthiojncce, 1865 ; Prsetorius, Aethi- 
opische Grammatik, Halle, 1886 ; Amharische Sprache, Halle, 1879. 

3 Hommel, Siidarabische Chrestomathie, 1893. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 47 

2. The Assyrian group is next to the Arabic in its stage of 
linguistic development. It embraces the Babylonian and the 
Assyrian, the ancient languages of the Shemitic population of 
the valleys of the Euphrates and of the Tigris. A vast number 
of inscriptions in these languages have been discovered and 
many libraries of clay tablets and bricks, which served in ancient 
times the purpose of rolls and books, have been unearthed. 
Great libraries of these ancient writings have been removed 
from the ruins of ancient cities and brought to the museums 
of Europe and America. A vast literature has been opened 
up, full of interest, and of immense value for the early history 
of mankind. It is said that this literature is so extensive that 
it will take all the Assyrian scholars of the world many years 
to decipher the whole of it. New discoveries increase the 
amount of literature more rapidly than it can be deciphered. 
This group of languages is intermediate between the Arabic 
and the Hebrew groups ; and accordingly it is of great impor- 
tance for showing the transition from Arabic types to Hebrew 
types. The Assyrian literature is nearer to the literature of 
the Old Testament than any other. For biblical scholars it 
is of inestimable value. A flood of light has been cast upon 
the Bible by its revelations. We may expect still greater help 
in the future.^ 

3. The Hebrew group embraces the Phoenician and a number 
of dialects of the Hebrew. The Phoenician is preserved in a large 
number of inscriptions discovered in ancient Phoenicia, at Car- 
thage, and other Phoenician colonies in North Africa and on 
the coasts of France and Spain, together with a few lines in 
the Poenulus of Plautus.^ Gesenius made a large collection 
of these inscriptions. But a more complete collection is in 
course of publication at Paris. ^ The Phoenician is helpful in 

' See E. Schrader, The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, trans. 
by 0. Wliitehouse, 1885-1888 ; Brown, Assyriologij, its Use and Abuse in Old 
Testament Study, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1885; Delitzsch, Fried., Assyrische 
Grammatik, Berlin, 1889 ; Assyrisches Handworterhuch, Leipzig, 1894-1896. 

2 V. 1-3. 

3 Gesenius, Scripturce Linguceque Phoenicioe, Lipsise, 1837 ; Corpus In- 
scriptionum Semiticum, Pars I., Inscriptiones PhoenicicB, Paris, 1881-1891 ; 
Schroeder, Phonizische Sprache, Halle, 1869 ; Levy, Phonizisches Worterhuchy 
Breslau, 1864 ; Bloch, Phoenisches Glossar, Berlin, 1890. 



48 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the study of archaic Hebrew forms. It is intermediate between 
the Assyrian and the Hebrew in its stage of linguistic develop- 
ment. The inscriptions also throw a great light upon the 
religion of the inhabitants of ancient Canaan. 

The Hebrew language itself is more extensive than the 
Hebrew of the Bible. It was the language of the ancient 
inhabitants of Canaan. This dialect is preserved only in a 
few proper names, and in the glosses to the Tell-el-Amarna 
Letters. 1 

The Moabite dialect was unknown until 1868, when the so- 
called Moabite stone was discovered at Dibon, on the east of 
the Jordan. This stone is now in the Louvre at Paris. It 
dates from the ninth century B.C. It is also called the Mesha 
Stone from the contents of the inscription. It is valuable for 
the side light it casts upon biblical history, and also upon the 
modes of writing ancient Hebrew. ^ 

The biblical Hebrew has several stages of development, and 
also dialects.^ The archaic, classic, and post-classic forms may 
be distinguished in the Bible. There was also an Ephraimitic 
dialect, tending to the Aramaic ; a trans-Jordanic, tending to 
the Arabic ; besides the Judaic, which became the classic type 
of Hebrew. 

The only ancient Hebrew apart from the Bible is the Siloam 
inscription discovered in 1880.* This is valuable for its ex- 
planation of ancient methods of writing words as well as for 
archaeological interests. 

An interesting and valuable specimen of Hebrew has recently 

1 H. Winckler, The Tell-el-Amarna Letters, Berlin and New York, 1896. 

2 Clermont Ganneau, La Stele de Mesa Boi de Moab, Paris, 1870 ; Smend and 
Socin, Die Lischrift des Konigs 3Iesa, Freib., 1886. 

3 Gesenius, Thesaurus philologicus criticus Imguce Hebrceoe et Chaldcue 
V.T., 3 Tom. 1835-1853; Gesenius, Hebrdisches und Aramdisches Handworter- 
buch iiber das A. T. 12te Aufl. von F. Buhl, 1895 ; A Hebrew and English Lexi- 
con of the Old Testament based on the Lexicon of Gesenius as translated by 
Ed. Bobinson, edited by Francis Brown, with the cooperation of S. R. Driver 
and C. A. Briggs, Parts I.-VII., 1891-1899; Konig, Historisch-kritisches Lehrge- 
bdude der Hebrdischen Sprache, 3 Theile, 1881-1897 ; Gesenius, Heb. Grain. 
umgearbeitet von E. Kautzsch, 26te Aufl., 1896, trans, by Collins and Cowley, 
Oxford, 1898. 

* Briggs, " Siloam Inscription," Presbyterian Beview, 1882. See also Driver, 
Books of Samuel, 1890, pp. xv. seq. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 49 

been discovered in part of the Hebrew text of the apocryphal 
book of " Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Ben Sira."^ 

The post-biblical Hebrew is a later development of the lan- 
guage in the direction of the Aramaic. It appears in the 
second and third Christian centuries in the Mishna, and the 
Baraithoth of the Tahnud, and in commentaries on the Penta- 
teuch. The new Hebrew is the language of the schools, and 
is no more a living tongue than the Latin of the schools is a 
living Latin. 2 

4. The A^mmaic group may be divided into the eastern and 
western families. The eastern includes the primitive language 
of northeastern Syria, the Syriac, the Mandaic, and the language 
of the Babylonian Gemara. The western includes the Pales- 
tinian dialect of the Aramaic, the Samaritan language, the 
language of Palmyra, and the Nabatean. The eastern Aramaic 
presents the oldest and strongest forms. Tlie chief member of 
the family is the Syriac^ which has a very extensive Christian 
literature, embracing the most important early versions of the 
New Testament from the second Christian century, several 
other important versions of the Bible,^ a considerable number 
of early apocryphal and pseudepigraphical writings, the works 
of the great theologian Ephraem of the fourth century, and a 
large amount of literature extending deep into the Middle Ages. 
Modern Syriac is spoken at present in Kurdistan and at Tur 
Abdin on the Tigris.^ 

A branch of eastern Aramaic is the dialect of the Mandseans, 
or Sabians, or Christians of St. John, who still survive in the 
neighbourhood of Basra and Wasit in lower Babylonia.^ 

1 Cowley, Neubauer, and Driver, The Original Hebrew of a Portion of Eccle- 
siasticus (391-5-4911), Oxford, 1897. 

2 Geiger, Lehrbuch zur Sprache der Mishna, Breslau, 1845 ; Strack, H. L., 
Lehrbuch der Neuhebrdischen Sprache und Litteratur, Karlsruhe, 1884. See, 
also, pp. 232 seq. 3 gee p. 212. 

* See Noeldeke, Thee, Kurzgefasste Syrische Grammatik, Leipzig, 1880 ; 
Nestle, Syriac Grammar with Bibliography, Chrestomathy, and Glossary, 1889 ; 
Duval, Traite de Gram. Syr., Faxis, 1881 ; Brockelmann, Lex. Syr., Berlin and 
Edinburgh, 1895 ; Smith, R. Payne, Thesaurus Syriacus, Oxford, 1868-1897 ; 
Castell, Edm., Lexicon Syriacum, Gottingen, 1788. 

5 Their chief w^ritings are the Ginza or Sidra Rabba, called the Book of Adam, 
and Sidra d'Yahya, or Book of John. See Noeldeke, Manddische Grammatik, 
Halle, 1875 ; Petermanu, Thesaurus sive Liber Magnus, 2 Bd., Berlin, 1867. 



50 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Babylonian Gemara and the Rabbinical literature founded 
thereon give another important dialect of the eastern Aramaic. ^ 

The western Aramaic presents the latest stage of the lan- 
guage in many respects. The earliest member of this family 
is the Samaritan^ which is a strange mixture of Aramaic and 
Hebrew, using side by side the Aramaic and the Hebrew forms 
of the relative pronoun and the plural of nouns, the Aramaic 
emphatic state, and the Hebrew article. But the language is 
essentially Aramaic. It has reached a more advanced stage of 
decay than any other of the Shemitic stock. Its literature is 
important, embracing a Targum of the Pentateuch, which dates 
in its written form from the second Christian century, and a 
number of historical, liturgical, and theological writings. ^ 

The ruins of Palmyra give inscriptions in another dialect of 
western Aramaic. The rocks of the peninsula of Sinai, of 
Petra, and the Huaran afford many inscriptions in a dialect 
that is called Nabatean.^ 

The Aramaic contained in the Old Testament,* the Aramaic 
specimens in the New Testament,^ the dialect of the Palestinian 
Gemara,^ and the Rabbinical literature founded thereon are all 
in the western Aramaic language. 

The early Palestinian Christians seem to Have used a dialect 
of the western Aramaic. Some specimens of this dialect have 
recently been discovered.'' 

All these languages are more closel}?" related to one another 

1 Levy, Jacob, Chalddisches Worterbuch, 2 Bd., Leipzig, 1876; Neuhebra- 
isches und Chalddisches Worterbuch uber die Tahnudim und 3Iidrashim, 4 Bd., 
Leipzig, 1876-1889 ; Dalman, Aramdisch Neuhebrdisches Worterbuch zu Tar- 
gum, Talmud und Midrasch, Teil L, 1897. See, also, pp. 232, 233. 

2 See Petermann, Brevis Linguice SamaritancB^ Berlin, 1873 ; Briggs, article 
on "Samaritans" in Johnson's Cyclopcedia ; Nutt, Samaritan History, Dogma, 
and Literature, London, 1874. 

3 See Neubauer in Studia Biblica, Oxford, 1885, L 3. 

* Luzzato, Grammar of the Biblical Chaldaic Language, New York, 1876 ; 
Brown, C R., Aramaic Method, New York, 1884; Kautzsch, Gram. d. Bibl. 
Aram., Leipzig, 1884 ; Strack, Gram. d. Bibl. Aram., Leipzig, 1897. 

o Meyer, Jesu 3futtersprache. Das galilaische Aramaisch in seine Bedeutung 
fiir die Erklarung der Reden Jesu. Frei. 1896. See pp. 404, 405. 

6 Dalman, Gram. d. judisch-paldstinischen Aramdisch, Leipzig, 1894 ; Ara- 
mdische Dialektproben, Leipzig, 1896. 

7 Lewis, A Palestinian Syriac Lectionary, Cambridge, 1897 ; Schwally, 
Idioticon des christlich-paldst. Aramdisch, Giessen, 1893. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 51 

than those of the Indo- Germanic family, the people speaking 
them having been confined to comparatively narrow limits, 
crowded on the north by the Indo-Germanic tongues, and on 
the south by the Turanian. These languages are grouped in 
sisterhoods. They all go back upon an original mother-tongue 
of which all traces have been lost. In general the Arabic or 
Southern group presents the older and fuller forms of etymology 
and syntax, the Aramaic or Northern group the later and sim- 
pler forms. The Hebrew and Assyrian groups lie in the midst 
of this linguistic development, where the Assyrian is nearer to 
the Southern group and the Hebrew to the Northern group. 
The differences in stage of linguistic growth from the common 
stock depend not so much upon the period or distance of sepa= 
ration as upon literary culture. The literary use of a lan- 
guage has the tendency to reduce the complex elements to 
order, and to simplify and wear away the superfluous and 
unnecessary forms of speech and syntactical construction. 
These languages have, for the most part, given us a consider- 
able literature; they were spoken by the most cultivated 
nations of the ancient world, mediating between the great cen- 
tres of primitive culture — the Euphrates and the Nile. Every- 
thing seems to indicate that they all emigrated from a common 
centre in the desert on the south of Babylonia,^ the Arabic 
group separating first, next the Aramaic, then the Hebrew, 
while the Babylonian gained ultimately the mastery of the 
original population of Babylonia, and the Assyrian founded the 
great empire on the Tigris. 

II. The Hebrew Language 

We have already, in the previous section, considered the 
Hebrew group of languages in general ; we have now to study 
the Hebrew language more particularly, especially as it is pre- 
sented to us in the Sacred Scriptures. The book of Genesis ^ 
represents Abram as going forth from Ur in Babylonia, at first 
northward into Mesopotamia, and then emigrating to Canaan, 

1 Schrader, Die Abstammung der Chaldder und die Ursitze der Semiten^ 
Zeitschrift d. Deutsch. M. G., 1873. 2 Qen. ll^i. 



52 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

just as we learn from other sources the Canaanites had done 
before him. The monuments of Ur reveal that about this 
time, 2000 B.C., it was the seat of a great literary develop- 
ment. ^ The father of the faithful, whose origin was in that 
primitive seat of culture, and who lived as a chieftain of mili- 
tary prowess,^ and exalted religious and moral character among 
the cultivated nations of Canaan ; and who was received at 
the court of Pharaoh,^ that other great centre of primitive cul- 
tTire, on friendly terms, to some extent at least made him- 
self acquainted with their literature and culture. Whether 
Abraham adopted the language of the Canaanites, or brought 
the Hebrew with him from the East, is unimportant, for the 
ancient Assyrian and Babylonian are nearer to the Hebrew 
and Phoenician than they are to the other Shemitic families. 
If these languages, as now presented to us, differ less than the 
Romance languages, — the daughters of the Latin ; in their 
earlier stages in the time of Abraham their difference could 
scarcely have been more than dialectic. The ancient Phoeni- 
cian, the nearest akin to the Hebrew, was the language of com- 
merce and intercourse between the nations in primitive times, 
as the Aramaic after the fall of Tyre, and the Greek after the 
conquest of Alexander. Thus the Hebrew language, as a dia- 
lect of the Canaanite and closely related to the Babylonian, had 
already a considerable literary development prior to the en- 
trance of Abraham into the Holy Land. The older scholars were 
naturally inclined to the opinion that Egypt was the mother 
of Hebrew civilization and culture. This has been disproved ; 
for, though the Hebrews remained a long period in Egyptian 
bondage, they retained their Eastern civilization, culture, and 
language, so that at the Exodus they shook off at once the 
Egyptian culture as alien and antagonistic to their own. For 
the very peculiarities of the Hebrew language, literature, and 
civilization are those of the Babylonian. The biblical tradi- 
tions of the Creation, of the Deluge, of the Tower of Babel, 
are those of the Assyrians and Babylonians. The sacred rest- 
day, with the significance of the number seven, the months, 

1 George Smith. The Chaldean Account of Genesis, etc., pp. 29 seq. New 
York, 1876. 2 Gen. 14. 3 Gen. \2^^*'i- 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 53 

seasons, and years, the weights and measures, coins, — all are 
of the same origin. Still further, that most striking feature of 
Hebrew poetry — the parallelism of members — is already in 
the oldest Babylonian hymns. ^ Yes, the very temptations of 
the Hebrews to the worship of Baal and Ashtoreth, of Chemosh 
and Moloch, are those that ruined the other branches of the 
Shemitic race.^ 

As Abraham went forth from the culture of Babylon to enter 
upon the pilgrim life in Canaan under the guidance of his cove- 
nant keeping God; so Moses went forth from the culture of Egypt 
to organize a kingdom of priests, a sacred nation of Yahweh. 
As Abraham was the father of the faithful, the great religious 
ancestor of Israel, Moses became the great prophetic lawgiver, 
the father of the prophetic and legal development of the king- 
dom of God. It is possible that traces of the influence of 
Egyptian civilization may yet be found in the earliest strata 
of the laws and institutions of Israel ; but little if any such 
influence has yet been disclosed. The Hebrews seem to have 
thrown off the culture of Egypt with its bondage. David 
founded the Hebrew monarchy and breathed a spirit of song 
into the national life, and Solomon became the father of 
Hebrew wisdom ; but it is altogether probable that the in- 
fluence of Moses, David, and Solomon upon the literary mon- 
uments, which have been preserved to us in Hebrew Law, 
Psalmody, and Wisdom, was little, if any, more than that of 
Samuel upon the literary monuments of Hebrew prophecy. 

Although we have in the Old Testament little, if any, litera- 
ture which may in its present form be ascribed to these fathers 
of the old covenant religion, yet their influence upon the lan- 
guage and literature was certainly creative and formative. They 
gave the language and the literature their essential spirit and 
genius. They made the language a religious language, and the 
literature a religious literature. They were the fathers of the 
great types of Law, Psalmody, and Wisdom ; and it was inevi- 
table that they should give their names to the great collections 
of these types of literature for all time. 

1 See pp. 879, 381. 

2 Schrader, Semitismus und Babylonismus^ Jahrb. v. Prot. Theol.j 1875. 



54 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Looking now at the language as religious according to its 
genius, and considering it in its fundamental types and their 
historical development, we observe the following as some of its 
most prominent characteristics : 

1. It is remarkably simple and natural. This is indeed a com- 
mon feature of the Shemitic languages. As compared with the 
Indo-Germanic, they represent an earlier stage in the develop- 
ment of mankind, the childhood of the race. Theirs is an age 
of perception, contemplation, and observation, not of conception, 
reflection, and reasoning. Things are apprehended according 
to their appearance as phenomena, and not according to their 
internal character as noumena. The form, the features, the ex- 
pressions of things are seen and most nicely distinguished, but 
not their inward being ; the effects are observed, but these are 
not traced through a series of causes, but only either to the im- 
mediate cause or else by a leap to the ultimate cause. Hence 
the language that expresses such thought is simple and natural. 
We see this in its sounds, which are simple and manifold, dis- 
liking diphthongs and compound letters ; in its roots, uniformly 
of three consonants, generally accompanied by a vowel ; in its 
inflections, mainly by internal modifications ; in its simple ar- 
rangements of clauses in the sentence, with a limited number of 
conjunctions. Thus the conjunction waw plays a more impor- 
tant part in the language than all conjunctions combined, dis- 
tinguished by a simple modification of vocalization, accentuation, 
or position, between clauses coordinate, circumstantial, and sub- 
ordinate, and in the latter between those indicating purpose 
and result.^ This is the most remarkable feature of the lan- 
guage, without a parallel in any other tongue. And so the 
poetry is constructed on the simple principle of the parallel- 
ism of members, these being synthetic, antithetic, or pro- 
gressive ; and in the latter case advancing, like the waves of 
the sea, in the most beautiful and varied forms.^ Hence it is 
that the Hebrew language is the easiest to render into a foreign 
tongue, and that Hebrew poetry can readily be made the common 
property of mankind. 

1 See Driver, Hebrew Tenses^ 3d ed., 1892. 

2 See Chap. XVI., Parallelisms of Hebrew Poetry. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 55 

2. We observe a striking correspondence of the language to 
the thought. This rests upon a radical difference between the 
Shemitic and Indo-Germanic family in their relative apprecia- 
tion of the material and the form of language. ^ The form, the 
artistic expression, is to the Hebrew a very small affair. The 
idea, the thought, and emotion flow forth freely and embody 
themselves without any external restraint in the speech. This 
is clear from the method of inflection, which is mostly by inter- 
nal changes in the root, expressing the passive by changing the 
clear vowel into the dull vowel,^ the intensive by doubling the 
second radical,^ the pure idea of the root by the extreme short- 
ness of the infinitive and the segholate,* the causative and the 
reflexive by lengthening the stem from without,^ and, so far 
as cases and moods exist, expressing them harmoniously by the 
three radical short vowels.^ 

How beautiful in form, as well as sense, is the abstract plural 
of intensity by which the fulness of the idea of God is conceived 
in such passages as these : 

" For Yahweh your God, He is the sovereign God ^ of gods, and 
the sovereign Lord of lords, the great and the mighty and the awe- 
inspiring God." 

" An allknoioing ^ God is Yahweh." 

" The knowledge of the All Holy ^ is understanding." 

" For high one over high one is watching, 
The Most High ^o over them." 

1 Grill, uber d. Verhdltniss d. indogerm. u. d. semit. Sprachwurzeln in the 
Zeitschrift D. M. G., 1873. 

2 The active of the simple form in Arabic is 3 m. s. Perf. qdtala, the passive 
qutila; the active of the intensive form in Hebrew is 3 m. s, Perf. qittel, the 
passive quttdh 

3 The simple form of the verb in Hebrew 3 m. s. Perf. is qatdl, the intensive 
qittel. The intensive nouns are in their ground form such as qattal, qittal, 
qiittal, qattil, qittil, qattul, qattol, qittul. 

* The infinitive in Hebrew is qHol ; the segholate normal forms are qatl, 
qitl, qutl. 

5 The causative stems prefix ha or sha ; the reflexive, Mth and na. 

6 In Arabic the moods of the imperfect are : indicative yaqtulu, subjunctive 
yaqtula, jussive yaqtuli, energetic yaqtulana ; preserved by the Hebrew in part 
in the indicative, jussive, and cohortative forms. In Arabic the cases are: 
nominative w, genitive t, accusative a ; also preserved in part in Hebrew in the 
poetic endings in i and o, and in the local accusative in a. 

7 D\nbs*n \nbK, d^hkh ^nK Dt. loi^. 9 n^ti^) Prov. 910. 

8 niUn bK 1 Sam. 23. lo D^■^nJ Ecc. 5^. 



56 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The fulness of life, of youth and of happiness for man are 
similarly expressed.^ 

We may mention also the dependence of the construct rela- 
tion, and the use of the suffixes. ^ This feature is striking in 
Hebrew poetry, where the absence of strictness of artistic form 
is more apparent. We see that, with a general harmony of 
lines and strophes, the proportion in length and number is not 
infrequently broken through, and thus indeed the artistic effect 
is heightened as in the Song of Deborah.^ And though the 
Hebrew poet uses the refrain, yet he likes to modify it, as in 
the lament of David over Jonathan,* and in the magnificent 
prophecy of the great prophet of the exile. ^ Again, though 
the Hebrew poet uses the alphabet to give his lines or strophes 
a regularity in order, using it as so many stairs up which to 
climb in praise, in pleading, in lamentation, and in advancing 
instruction,^ yet in the book of Lamentations each chapter 
varies in number of lines, and in use of alphabet. Free as the 
ocean is the poet's emotion, rising like the waves in majestic 
strivings, heaving as an agitated sea, ebbing and flowing like 
the tide in solemn and measured antitheses, sporting like the 
wavelets upon a sandy beach. 

3. The Hebrew language has a wonderful majesty and sub- 
limity. This arises partly from its original religious genius, but 
chiefly from the sublime materials of its thought. God, the 
only true God, Yahweh, the Holy Redeemer of His people, is 
the central theme of the Hebrew language and literature, a 
God not apart from nature, and not involved in nature, no 
Pantheistic God, no mere Deistic God, but a God who enters 
into sympathetic relations with His creatures, who is recog- 

^ E.g., the Hebrew language gives the two words : Word of God., in construct 
relation, and expresses the relation between them by an internal change in the 
vowel of one of them, rather than by the insertion of a preposition, or the use of 
a case : e.g. D^bhar ^Elohim. In late Hebrew this might be given as Dahhar le 
^Elohim. The possessive pronoun is attached to the noun as a suffix : e.g. d'bharo 
= his word. 3 jd. 5. 4 2 Sam. 119-2'. 

s Is. 40-66. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, pp. 338 seq. 

^ These are specimens of alphabetical poems. Pss. 9-10, 34, 37, 111, 112. 
119, 145; Lam. 1-4. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 57 

nized and praised, as well as ministered nnto by the material 
creation. Hence there is a realism in the Hebrew language 
that can nowhere else be found to the same extent. The 
Hebrew people were as realistic as the Greek were idealistic. 
Their God is not a God thought out, reasoned out as an ulti- 
mate cause, or chief of a Pantheon, but a personal God, known 
by them in His association with them by a proper name, Yahweh. 
Hence the so-called anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms 
of the Old Testament, so alien to the Indo-Germanic mind that 
an Occidental theology must explain them away, from an in- 
capacity to enter into that bold and sublime realism of the 
Hebrews. Thus, again, man is presented to us in all his naked 
reality, in his weakness and sins, in his depravity and wretched- 
ness, as well as in his bravery and beauty, his holiness and wis- 
dom. In the Hebrew heroes we see men of like passions with 
ourselves, and feel that their experience is the key to the joys 
and sorrows of our life. So also in their conception of nature. 
Nature is to the Hebrew poet all aglow with the glory of God, 
and intimately associated with man in his origin, history, and 
destiny. There is no such thing as science ; that was for the 
Indo-Germanic mind ; but they give us that which science never 
gives, that which science is from its nature unable to present 
us : namely, those concrete relations, those expressive features of 
nature that declare to man their Master's mind and character, 
and claim human sympathy and protection as they yearn with 
man for the Messianic future. Now the Hebrew language mani- 
fests this realism on its very face. Its richness in synonyms is 
remarkable. It is said that the Hebrew language has, relatively 
to the English, ten times as many roots and ten times fewer 
words ; ^ and that while the Greek language has 1800 roots to 
100,000 words, the Hebrew has 2000 roots to 10,000 words.2 
This wealth in synonyms is appalling to the Indo-Germanic 
scholar who comes to the Hebrew from the Latin and the Greek, 
where the synonyms are more or less accurately defined. But 
nothing of the kind has yet been done by any Shemitic scholar. 
It is exceedingly doubtful whether this richness of synonyms 

1 Grill, in I.e. 

2 Bottcher, Ausf. Lehrbuch d. Heh. Sprache, I. p. 8. Leipzig, 1866. 



58 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUKE 

can be reduced to a system and the terms sharply and clearly 
defined ; the differences are like those of the peculiar gutturals 
of the Shemitic tongues, so delicate and subtle that they can 
hardly be mastered by the Western tongue or ear. 

This wealth of synonym is connected with a corresponding 
richness of expression in the synonymous clauses that play such 
an important part in Hebrew poetry, and indeed are the reason 
of its wonderful richness and majesty of thought. ^ Thus the 
sacred poet or prophet plays upon his theme as upon a many- 
stringed instrument, bringing out a great variety of tone and 
melody, advancing in graceful steppings or stately marchings 
to the climax, or dwelling upon the theme with an inexhausti- 
ble variety of expression and colouring. The Hebrew language 
is like the rich and glorious verdure of Lebanon, or as the lovely 
face of the Shulamite, dark as the tents of Kedar, yet rich in 
colour as the curtains of Solomon, or her graceful form, which is 
so rapturously described as she discloses its beauties in the 
dance of the hosts. ^ It is true that Hebrew literature is not 
as extensive as the Greek ; it is confined to history, poetry, 
fiction, oratory, and ethical wisdom ; ^ but in these departments 
it presents the grandest productions of the human soul. Its 
history gives us the origin and destiny of our race, unfolds the 
story of redemption, dealing now with the individual, then with 
the family and nation, and at times widening so as to take into 
its field of representation the most distant nations of earth ; it 
is a history in which God is the great actor, in which sin and 
holiness are the chief factors. Its poetry stirs the heart of 
mankind with hymns and prayers, and sentences of wisdom ; 
and in the heroic struggles of a Job and the conquering virtue 
of a Shulamite, there is imparted strength to the soul and vigour 
to the character of man and woman transcending the influence 
of the godlike Achilles or the chaste Lucretia. The great 
prophet of the exile * presents the sublimest aspirations of man. 
Where shall we find such images of beauty, such wealth of 
illustration, such grandeur of delineation, such majestic repre- 
sentations ? It seems as if the prophet grasped in his tremen- 

1 See pp. 366 seq. 3 gee Chap. XIII. and XVII. 

2 Song of Songs, 1° ; 7i-7. 4 jg. 40-66. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 59 

dous soul the movements of the ages, and saw the very future 
mirrored in the mind of God. 

4. The Hebrew language is remarkable for its life and fervour. 
This is owing to the emotional and hearty character of the 
people. There is an artlessness, self-abandonment, and earnest- 
ness in the Hebrew tongue ; it is transparent as a glass, so that 
we see through it as into the very souls of the people. There 
is none of that reserve, that cool and calm deliberation, that 
self -consciousness that characterize the Greek. ^ The Hebrew 
language is distinguished by the strength of its consonants and 
the weakness of its vowels ; so that the consonants give the 
word a stability of form in which the vowels have the greatest 
freedom of movement. The vowels circulate in the speech as 
the blood of the language. Hence the freedom in the varying 
expressions of the same root and the fervour of its full-toned 
forms. And if we can trust the Massoretic system of accentua- 
tion and vocalization, the inflection of the language depends 
upon the dislike of the recurrence of two vowelless consonants; ^ 
and on the power of the accent over the vocalization not only 
of the accented syllable, but also of the entire word.^ This 
gives the language a wonderful flexibility and elasticity. In 
the Hebrew tongue the emotions overpower the thoughts and 
carry them on in the rushing stream to the expression. Hence 
the literature has a power over the souls of mankind. The 
language is as expressive of emotion as the face of a modest 
and untutored child, and the literature is but the speaking face 
of the heart of the Hebrew people. The Psalms touch a chord 
in every soul, and interpret the experience of all the world. 
The sentences of wisdom come to us as the home-truths, as the 
social and political maxims that sway our minds and direct our 
lives. The prophets present to us the objective omnipotent 
truth, which, according to the beautiful story of Zerubba- 

1 Ewald, in I.e., p. 33; Bottcher, in I.e., p. 9. Bertheau, in Herzog, Beal 
UncyJclopddie, I. Aufl. Bd. v. p. 613. 

2 Hence the remarkable use of the Sliewas and the law of the half-open syl- 
lable. In the oldest language doubtless every consonant had a full vowel as in 
Arabic. 

3 Hence the use of the pretonic Qdmetz. It is doubtful whether this belongs 
to the ancient language. The principle is, however, independent of this question. 



60 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

bel,^ is the mightiest of all, flashing conviction like the sun and 
cutting to the heart as by a sharp two-edged sword. ^ The his- 
tory presents us the simple facts of the lives of individuals and 
of nations in the light of the divine countenance, speaking to 
our hearts and photographing upon us pictures of real life. 

These are some of the most striking features of the Hebrew 
language, which have made it the most suitable of all languages 
to give to mankind the elementary religious truths and facts 
of divine revelation. The great body of the Bible, four-fifths 
of the sum total of God's Word, is in this tongue. It is no 
credit to the American people that the Hebrew language has no 
place at all in many of our colleges and universities ; that its 
study has been confined to so great an extent to theological 
seminaries and to the students for the ministry. It is not 
strange that the Qld Testament has been neglected in the pul- 
pit, the Sabbath school, and the family, so that many, even of 
the ministry, have doubted whether it was any longer to be 
regarded as the Word of God. It is not strange that Christian 
scholars, prejudiced by their training in the languages and 
literatures of Greece and Rome, should be unable to enter into 
the spirit, and appreciate the peculiar features of the Hebrew 
language and literature, and so fail to understand the elements 
of a divine revelation. Separating the New Testament and the 
words and work of Jesus and His apostles from their founda- 
tion and their historical preparation, students have not caught 
the true spirit of the Gospel, nor apprehended it in its unity 
and variety as the fulfilment of the law and the prophets. ^ But 
this is not all, for we shall now attempt to show that the other 
languages of the Bible, the Aramaic and the Greek, have been 
moulded and transformed by the theological conceptions and 
moral ideas that had been developing in the Hebrew Scriptures, 
and which, having been ripened under the potent influence of 
the Divine Spirit, were about to burst forth into bloom and 
eternal fruitfulness in these tongues prepared by Divine Provi- 

1 I. Esdras 433-41. 2 Heb. 41-^. 

3 It is becoming more evident now than ever that it is impossible rightly to 
interpret the New Testament without a thorough knowledge of the Hebrew and 
Aramaic languages, in which indeed the words of Jesus and the primary sources 
of the New Testament writings were given. See pp. 190, 244. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 61 

dence for the purpose. The Hebrew language is, as we have 
seen, the language of religion, and moulded entirely by religious 
and moral ideas and emotions. The Greek and the Aramaic 
are of an entirely different character ; they were not, as the 
Hebrew, cradled and nursed, trained from infancy to childhood, 
armed and equipped in their heroic youth with divine revela- 
tion, but they were moulded outside of the realm of divine reve- 
lation, and only subsequently adapted for the declaration of 
sacred truth. And first this was the case with the Aramaic. 

III. The Aramaic Language 

goes back in its history to the most primitive times. It is the 
farthest developed of the Shemitic family, showing a decline, 
a decrepitude, in its poverty of forms and vocalization, in its 
brevity and abruptness, in its pleonasm, and in its incorpora- 
tion of a multitude of foreign words. It was the language of 
those races of Syria and Mesopotamia that warred with the 
Egyptians and Assyrians, and possibly, as Gladstone suggests, 
took part in the Trojan War,i who were the agents through 
whom both the Hebrew and the Greek alphabets were con- 
veyed to those peoples. At all events the Aramaic became the 
language of commerce and intercourse between the nations 
during the Persian period,^ taking the place of the Phoenician, 
as it was in turn supplanted by the Greek. The children of 
Judah having been carried into captivity and violently sepa- 
rated from their sacred places and the scenes of their history, 
gradually acquired this commercial and common language of 
intercourse, so that ere long it became the language of the 
Hebrew people, the knowledge of the ancient Hebrew being 
confined to the learned and the higher ranks of society. Hence, 
even in the books of Ezra and Daniel, considerable portions 
were written in Aramaic.^ 

The Aramaic continued to be the language of the Jews 
during the Persian, Greek, and Roman periods, and was the 

1 Gladstone's Homeric Synchronism^ New York, 1876, p. 173. 

2 It must also have been widely spoken in the Assyrian period, as we see from 
2 Kg. 1811 ; see also Fried. Delitzsch, Wo Lag das Paradies. Leipzig, 1881, 
p. 258. 3 See pp. 172, 351. 



62 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

common speech of Palestine in the times of our Lord,i although 
it had long ceased to be the language of commerce and inter- 
course, the Greek having taken its place. And so the Greek 
gradually penetrated from the commercial and official circles 
even to the lowest ranks of society. Thus there was a min- 
gling of a Greek population with the Shemitic races, not only in 
the Greek colonies of the Decapolis and the cities of the sea- 
coast of Palestine, but also in the great centres of Tiberias, 
Samaria, and even in Jerusalem itself. Greek manners and 
customs were, under the influence of the Herodians and the 
Sadducees, pressing upon the older Aramaic and Hebrew, not 
without the stout resistance of the Pharisees. The language 
of our Saviour, however, in which He delivered His discourses 
and instructions, was undoubtedly the Aramaic. For not only 
do the Aramaic terms that He used^ which are retained at times 
by the evangelists, and the proper names of His disciples, but 
also the very structure and style of His discourses, show the 
Aramaic characteristics. Our Saviour's methods of delivery 
and style of instruction were also essentially the same as those 
of the rabbins of His time. Hence we should not think it 
strange that from the Hebrew and Aramaic literature alone we 
can bring forward parallels to the wise sentences and moral 
maxims of the Sermon on the Mount, the rich and beautiful 
parables, by which He illustrated His discourses, and the fiery 
zeal of His denunciation of hypocrisy, together with the pro- 
found depths of His esoteric instruction. Our Saviour used 
the Aramaic language and methods, in order thereby to reach 
the people of His times, and place in the prepared Aramaic 
soil the precious seeds of heavenly truth. It is the providential 
significance of the Aramaic language that it thus prepared 
the body for the thought of our Saviour. It is a language 
admirably adapted by its simplicity, perspicuity, precision, and 
definiteness, with all its awkwardness, for the associations of 
e very-day life. It is the language for the lawyer and the 
scribe, the pedagogue and the pupil ; indeed, the English 
language of the Shemitic family. ^ Thus the earlier Aramaic 

1 Schiirer, Neutestament. Zeitgesch., Leipzig, 1874, p. 372. See pp. 172 seq. 

2 Volck in Herzog's Beal Encyklopddie, II. Aufl. 1, p. 603. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 63 

of the Bible gives us only official documents, letters, and 
decrees, or else simple narrative. But the language was subse- 
quently moulded by the Jewish people after the return from 
exile, through the giving of the sense of the original Hebrew 
Scriptures.^ This resulted in the production of oral targums 
or popular versions of the ancient scriptures which were handed 
down by oral transmission by those who officiated in the syna- 
gogues and were not committed to writing until after centuries 
of oral use. 2 The life of the Jewish people, subsequent to the 
exile, was largely devoted to this giving of the sense of the 
Hebrew Scriptures, both in the Halacha of the rabbinical 
schools, and in the Haggada of the synagogue and the social 
circle.^ It is true that the Halaeha was developed in the rival 
schools of Shammai and Hillel into the most subtle questions 
of casuistry, and our Saviour often severely reproved the 
Pharisaic spirit for its subtlety and scholasticism ; yet not 
infrequently He employed their methods to the discomfiture of 
His opponents,^ although His own spirit was rather that of the 
old prophets than of the scribes. The Haggada was developed 
by the rabbins into a great variety of forms of ethical wisdom 
and legend. This we see already in the apocryphal books of 
Wisdom, in the stories of Zerubbabel, of Judith, of Susanna, 
and of Tobit.^ This latter method was the favourite one of our 
Saviour, as suited for the instruction of the common people, 
and to it we may attribute the parables, which, though after 
the manner of the scribes,^ have yet a clearness and trans- 
parency as the atmosphere of the Holy Land itself, a richness 
and simplicity as the scarlet flower of the fields He loved so 
well, a calm majesty and profound mystery as the great deep ; 
for He was the expositor of the divine mind, heart, and being 
to mankind. "^ 

1 Neh. 88. 2 See pp. 210 seq. 3 gee pp. 430 seq. 

* Mt. 2215-46. See Weizsacker, Untersuchungen uber die ev. Geschichte, 
Gotha, 1864, pp. 358 seq. 

5 Zunz, Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden., Berlin, 1832, pp. 42, 100, 120 ; 
Etheridge, Introduction to Hebreiu Literature, London, 1856, pp. 102 seq. Those 
who are interested in this subject may find a large collection of this Haggadistic 
literature in the Bihliotheca Bahbinica, Eine Sammlung Alter Midraschim ins 
Deutsche iihertragen von Aug. Wiinsche, 20 Lief. Leipzig, 1880-84. 

90. 7 John 11^ 



64 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The richest collection of the words of Jesus is the sen- 
tences of Wisdom, uttered originally in Aramaic, but trans- 
lated by the apostle Matthew in his Logia ^ into Hebrew, and 
then finally in our synoptic Gospels into Greek. No one can 
fully understand them until he traces them back to their 
Shemitic originals and sees them in the measured lines and 
well ordered strophes and varied parallelisms characteristic of 
Hebrew and Aramaic gnomic poetry. ^ 

The office of the Aramaic language was to mediate between 
the old world and the new — the Hebrew and the Greek ; for 
the Greek language was the one chosen to set forth the divine 
revelation in its fulness. 

IV. The Greek Language 

was born and grew to full maturity outside of the sphere of 
the divine revelation, and yet was predestined "as the most 
beautiful, rich, and harmonious language ever spoken or 
written " " to form the pictures of silver in which the golden 
apple of the Gospel should be preserved for all generations."^ 
For, as Alexander the Great broke in pieces the Oriental 
world-monarchies that fettered the kingdom of God, and pre- 
pared a theatre for its world-wide expansion, so did the Greek 
language and literature, that his veterans carried with them, 
prove more potent weapons than their swords and spears for 
transforming the civilization of the East and preparing a lan- 
guage for the universal Gospel. The Greek language is the 
beautiful flower, the elegant jewel, the most finished master- 
piece of Indo-Germanic thought. In its early beginning we 
see a number of dialects spoken by a brave and warlike jjeople, 
struggling with one another, as well as with external foes, 
maintaining themselves successfully against the Oriental and 
African civilizations, while at the same time they appropriated 

1 See McGiffert, Eusebius, pp. 152, 153, 173, and Briggs, Messiah of the Gos- 
pels, pp. 41 seq., 71 seq. 

2 See my articles on " The Wisdom of Jesus," in tlie Expository Times^ June, 
July. August, and November, 1897. 

3 Schaff, Hist, of the Apostolic Church, p. 145. New York, 1859. See also 
Schaff, Histonj of the Christian Church, I. p. 78. New York, 1882. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCllIPTURE 65 

those elements of culture which they could incorporate into 
their own original thought and life ; a race of heroes such as 
the earth has nowhere else produced, fighting their way up- 
ward into light and culture until they attained the towering 
summits of an art, a literature, and a philosophy, that has ever 
been the admiration and wonder of mankind. As Pallas 
sprang forth in full heroic stature from the head of her father 
Zeus, so Greek literature sprang into historical existence in 
the matchless Iliad. Its classic period was constituted by the 
heroism and genius of the Athenian republic, which worked 
even more mightily in language, literature, and art, than in the 
fields of politics and war, producing the histories of a Thu- 
cydides and a Xenophon, the tragedies of an ^schylus and a 
Sophocles, the philosophy of a Socrates and a Plato, the oratory 
of a Demosthenes and an ^schines. Looking at the Greek 
language before it became the world-language, and so the lan- 
guage of a divine revelation, we observe that its characteristic 
features are in strong contrast with those of the Hebrew 
tongue. 

1. The Greek language is complex and artistic. As the 
Hebrew mind perceives and contemplates, the Greek conceives 
and reflects. Hence the Greek etymology is elaborate in its 
development of forms from a few roots, in the declensions and 
cases of nouns, in the conjugations, tenses, and moods of the 
verb, giving the idea a great variety of modifications. Hence 
the syntax is exceedingly complex in the varied use of the con- 
junctions and particles, the intricate arrangement of the sen- 
tences as they may be combined into grand periods, which 
require the closest attention of a practised mind to follow, in 
their nice discriminations and adjustments of the thought. ^ 
Hence the complex and delicate rules of prosody, with the 
great variety of metres and rhythms. The Greek mind would 
wrestle with the external world, would search out and explore 
the reason of things, not being satisfied with the phenomena, but 
grasping for the noumena. Thus a rich and varied literature 
was developed, complex in character, for the epos, the drama, 

1 Curtius, Chnech. Gesch., Berlin, 1865, 2d Aufl., L pp. 19, 20; History 
of Greece, New York, 1875, Vol. I. pp. 30, 32. 



66 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the philosophical treatise, and scientific discussion are purely- 
Greek, and could have little place among the Hebrews, i 

2. The Greek language is characterized by its attention 
to the form or style of its speech^ not to limit the freedom of 
the movement of thought and emotion, but to direct them in 
the channels of clear, definite, logical sentences, and beautiful, 
elegant, and artistic rhetorical figures. The Greek was a 
thorough artist ; and as the palaces of his princes, the temples 
of his gods, the images of his worship, his clothing and his 
armour, must be perfect in form and exquisite in finished deco- 
ration, so the language, as the palace, the dress of his thought, 
must be symmetrical and elegant. ^ Hence there is no language 
that has such laws of euphony, involving changes in vocaliza- 
tion, and the transposition and mutation of letters ; for their 
words must be musical, their clauses harmonious, their sen- 
tences and periods symmetrical. And so they are combined 
in the most exquisite taste in the dialogues of the philosopher, 
the measures of the poet, the stately periods of the historian 
and the orator. The sentences " are intricate, complex, in- 
volved like an ivory cabinet, till the discovery^ of its nomina- 
tive gives you the key for unlocking the mechanism and 
admiring the ingenuity and beauty of its rhetoric." ^ 

3. The Greek language is thus beautiful and finished. The 
Greek mind was essentially ideal^ not accepting the external 
world as its own, but transforming it to suit its genius and its 
taste. This was owing to its original humanizing genius and 
its central theme, man as the heroic, man as the ideally per- 
fect.* As the language and literature of the Hebrews were 
inspired to describe the righteous acts of Yahweh's dominion 
in Israel and the victories of His holy arm.^ and thus were 
majestic and sublime ; so the language and literature of the 
Greeks were to sing the exploits of the godlike Achilles, the 

1 Donaldson, The New Cratylus, 3d ed. p. 153. 

2 Curtius, Griech. Gesch. I. pp. 20, 21 ; History of Greece, New York, 1875, 
I. pp. 32-34. 

3 W. Adams, Charge on Occasion of the Induction of Dr. Shedd as Professor 
of Biblical Literature, New York, 1864, p. 10. 

* Schaff, Apostolic Church, New York, p. 145 ; Zezscliwitz, Profangrdcitdt 
und hihlischer Sprachgebrauch, Leipzig, 1869, p. 13. ^ Jd. 5ii ; Ps. 98^. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 67 

crafty Ulysses, and the all-conquering Hercules ; to paint 
the heroic struggles of the tribes at Thermopylae, Salamis, and 
Platea, to conceive a model republic and an ideal human world, 
and thus were beautiful, stately, and charming. The gods are 
idealized virtues and vices and powers of nature, and con- 
ceived after the fashion of heroic men and women, arranged 
in a mythology which is a marvel of taste and genius. Nature 
is idealized, and every plant and tree and fountain becomes a 
living being. Indeed, everything that the Greek mind touched 
it clothed with its own ideals of beauty. Hence the drama is 
the most appropriate literature for such a people, and the dia- 
logue the proper method of its philosophy. ^ 

4. The Greek language has remarkable strength and vigour. 
Its stems have been compressed, vowel and consonant com- 
pacted together. Its words are complete in themselves, end- 
ing only in vowels and the consonants n^ r, and s ; they have a 
singular independence, as the Greek citizen and warrior, and 
are protected from mutilation and change. ^ It is true it has 
a limited number of roots, yet it is capable of developing there- 
from a great variety of words ; ^ so that although it cannot 
approach the wealth of synonym of the Hebrew, yet its words 
are trained as the athlete, and capable of a great variety of 
movements and striking effects. Its syntax is organized on 
the most perfect system, all its parts compacted into a solid 
mass, in which the individual is not lost, but gives his strength 
to impart to the whole the weight and invincible push of the 
phalanx. Hence the Greek language is peculiarly the lan- 
guage of oratory that would sway the mind and conquer with 
invincible argument. It is the language of a Demosthenes, the 
model orator for the world. It wrestles with the mind, it 
parries and thrusts, it conquers as an armed host. 

Such was the language with which Alexander went forth to 
subdue the world, and which he made the common speech of 
the nations for many generations. It is true that the Greek 

1 Curtius, Griech. Gesch. III. p. 508 ; History of Greece, New York, 1875, 
Vol. Y. pp. 169, 170. 

'^ Curtius, Griech. Gesch. I. p. 18 ; Hist, of Greece, New York, 1875, Vol. I. 
p. 29. 

8 Jelf, Greek Gram. 4th ed., Oxford, 1864, p. 330. 



68 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

was required to forfeit somewhat of its elegance and refinement 
in its collision with so many barbarous tongues, but it lost 
none of its essential characteristics when it was adopted by the 
Egyptian, the Syrian, and the Jew. The Jews were scattered 
widely in the earth, engaged in commercial pursuits that 
required them, above all others, to master the common speech 
of the nations. Hence those of Europe, Asia Minor, and 
Africa, easily adopted the Greek as their vernacular, and it 
gradually became more and more the language of Syria and 
Palestine. This was furthered by the translation of the 
Hebrew Scriptures into the Greek at Alexandria, the centre of 
the Greek culture of the times. This translation shows upon 
its face the difficulties of rendering for the first time foreign 
conceptions into a strange tongue,^ but nevertheless it became 
of incalculable importance in preparing the way for the New 
Testament writers. The original productions of the Jews of 
Alexandria and Palestine, some of which are preserved in the 
apocryphal books of the Old Testament and the Pseudepi- 
grapha combined to produce the same result. ^ Gradually the 
Jewish mind was modified by the Greek thought and culture, 
and the Greek language was, on the other hand, adapted to the 
expression of Hebrew and Aramaic conceptions. The apostles 
of our Lord, if they were to carry on a work and exert an 
influence, world-wide and enduring, were required, from the 
very circumstances of the times, to use the Greek; for the 
Aramaic would have had but a narrow and ever-diminishing 
influence, even if their labours had been confined to the syna- 
gogues of the dispersed Jews in Palestine and Syria. Hence 
we are not surprised that, without an exception, so far as we 
know, our New Testament writers composed their works in 
Greek, yes, even gave us the Aramaic discourses of our Saviour 
in the Greek tongue. Nor was this without its providential 
purpose ; for though our Saviour delivered His discourses in 
Aramaic, yet they were not taken down by the apostles as they 

1 Reuss, Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog, Beal Encyklopddie, I. Auti. p. 709, 
II. Aufl. p. 7-45 ; Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, Oxford, 1889, pp. 1 seq. 

2 See Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 4 seq. ; and Messiah of the Apostles, 
pp. 13 seq. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 69 

heard them in that tongue, but were subsequently recalled to 
their minds by the Holy Spirit, who, in accordance with the 
promise of our Lord, brought all things to their remembrance. ^ 
These then transmitted them to their disciples either in 
Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek, as they found it most convenient 
in their teaching and preaching in different lands and among 
many different nations. The original Logia of St. Matthew 
and the sources of the Gospel of the Infancy, and possibly the 
original Gospel of St. John, were written in Hebrew. But in 
whatever way the disciples of the apostles received the teach- 
ing of Jesus, they gave it to the world in Greek, and it remains 
for the world in the Greek language alone. It is evident there- 
fore that we have the teaching of Jesus as it passed from the 
Aramaic, in part, at least, through the Hebraic conceptions of 
those who gave the primary oral and written sources, and the 
whole of it through the Hellenistic conceptions of the writers 
of our present Gospels. The words of Jesus have been coloured 
and paraphrased by the minds and characters of those who were 
guided by the Divine Spirit to report them. 

This process of change may easily be traced in the use of the 
original Logia by the Gospels ; e.g. there can be little doubt that 
this is an original logion of Jesus : 

Whoso findetli his life shall lose it ; 
But whoso loseth his life shall find it. 

This is a simple antithetic couplet of the tetrameter movement,^ 
complete and perfect in itself. This was cited Mk. 8^ as follows : 

Whosoever would save his life shall lose it ; 

And whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's shall save it. 

It is evident that Mark interprets in the use of " would save " and 
" shall save " for " find " in the two clauses ; and that it inserts 
^^ for my sake and the gospel's " in order to show that this loss of 
life must have a Christian motive. Furthermore, this addition 
destroys the measure of the line and transforms the couplet from 
poetry to prose. 

Matthew 16^ cites from Mark, the primary gospel, as usual; 
but it omits " and the gospel's " and restores the original " shall 
find it " in the second clause instead of Mark's " shall save it." 

1 John 1423. 2 See pp. 379, 385. 



70 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Luke 9-^ also cites from Mark, leaving out " and the gospel's," 
but inserting the demonstrative " the same shall save it." 

But Matthew and Luke in other passages cite the logion directly 
from the Logia, and not mediately through Mark. Thus Mt. 10^ 
cites it exactly from the Logia, and makes no change except by 
inserting " for my sake " in the second clause. Luke 17^, how- 
ever, paraphrases here so that the most of the language is new: 

Whosoever shall seek to gain his life shall lose it ; 
But whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it. 

It is noteworthy, however, that no additions are made to it. 
But the greatest change is found in the Gospel of John 12^ : 

He that loveth his life shall lose it ; 

And he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. 

The first line is simply a paraphrase, but the second line makes 
a long insertion as well as a paraphrase, so that nothing of the 
original is left but the substance of the thought. Furthermore, 
the antitheses of love and hate, and of this world and the life 
eternal, are characteristic of the author of John's gospel, and 
show clearly how his mind has coloured and reconstructed the 
logion of Jesus. 

It was evidently the design of God that the Saviour's words, 
as well as acts and His glorious person, should be presented to 
the world through those four typical evangelists, who appropri- 
ately represent the four chief phases of human character and 
experience, and that they should be stereotyped in the Greek 
language. 1 

The New Testament writers used the common Greek of their 
time, yet as men who had been trained in the Hebrew Script- 
ures and in the Rabbinical methods of exposition, but above all 
as holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. 
Hence, as the Greek language had now to perform a work for 
which it had providentially been preparing, and yet one which 
it had never yet attempted, namely, to conve}' the divine reve- 
lation to mankind, so it must be remoulded and shaped by the 
mind of the Spirit to express ideas that were new both to the 
Greek and the Jew, but which had been developing in the lan- 
guages and literatures of both nations, for each in its way pre- 

1 Winer, New Test. Gram., Thayer's edit., Andover, 1872, p. 27; Bleek, 
Einleit. in d. N. T., II. Aufl., Berlin, 1866, p. 76 ; Edin., 1869, pp. 72 seq. 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRH^TURE 71 

pared for the Gospel of Christ. ^ Hence we are not surprised 
that the biblical Greek should be distinguished not only from 
the classic models, but also from the literary Greek of the time. 
When compared with the Greek of the Septuagint and the 
Apocrypha, it approximates more to the literary Greek, being 
'' not the slavish idiom of a translation, but a free, language- 
creating idiom, without, however, denying its cradle." ^ It is 
true that much of its elegance and artistic finish has been lost, 
and the nicely rounded sentences and elaborate periods, with 
their delicately shaded conceptions, have disappeared, yet its 
distinguishing characteristics, especially its strength and 
beauty, its perspicuity, and its logical and rhetorical power, 
have been preserved ; while to these have been added the sim- 
plicity and richness, the ardour and glow of the Shemitic style ; 
but over and above all these, the language has been employed 
by the Spirit of God, and transformed and transfigured, yes, 
glorified, with a light and sacredness that the classic literature 
never possessed.^ 

It is true that the writings of the New Testament are not 
all on the same level of style and language.* The gospels of 
Matthew and Mark, and the Epistle of James, together with 
the Apocalypse, have stronger Hebraic or Aramaic colouring,^ 
which disturbs the Greek lines of beauty, the Greek form 
being overpowered by the life and glow of the Shemitic emo- 
tion. In the writings of Luke and John, and especially of 
Paul and the Epistle to the Hebrews, the strength and excel- 
lence of the Greek unite with the peculiarities of the Aramaic 
and the Hebrew in striving, under the potent influence of the 
Holy Spirit, to convey the new religion in the most adequate 
and appropriate language and style. 

1 Schaff, Apostolic Church, p. 146 ; also Schaff, History of the Christian 
Church, L pp. 76 seq. 

2 Reuss, Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog, I. Aufl., V. p. 710; II. Aufl., V. 
p. 747 ; Winer, New Test. Gram. , p. 39. 

3 Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, Oxford, 1889 ; Kennedy, Sources of New 
Testament Greek, ^diii., 1895; Vincent, Students New Testament Handbook, 
1893, pp. 4-10. 

* Immer, Hermeneutik des Neuen Testaments, Wittemberg, 1873, pp. 106 seq., 
Amer. ed., Andover, 1877, p. 132 ; Reuss, in I.e., p. 747. 

^ TJiis is due in large measure to their Hebraic and Aramaic sources. 



72 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Here the humanizing and idealistic tendencies of the Greek 
combine with the theological and realistic tendencies of the 
Hebrew and the Aramaic ; for to these New Testament writers 
the person of Christ assumes the central and determining posi- 
tion and influence, as Yahweh the one God did to the Old 
Testament writers. Christ is Lord in the New Testament as 
Yahweh is Lord in the Old Testament. Christ became the 
emperor of the Scriptures, to use Luther's expression, and His 
person irradiated its language and literature with His own 
light and glory. Thus when the mind now no longer strove 
to conceive the simple idea of the one God Yahweh, but the 
complex idea of the person of Christ as Messiah and Lord, and 
eventually as God, the Hebrew and Aramaic languages were 
entirely inadequate ; and the Greek, as the most capable, must 
be strained and tried to the utmost to convey the idea of the logos^ 
who was in the beginning, was with God, and was God, and yet 
became the incarnate Word, the God-man, the interpreter in com- 
plete humanity of the fulness of the Deity. ^ Notwithstanding 
the historical preparation for this conception in the theophanies 
of the Hebrews, the nous of Plato, the logos of Philo, and the 
wisdom of Solomon and Sirach, it was yet a new conception, 
which the world could not appropriate without the transform- 
ing and enlightening influence of the Spirit of God.^ So in 
anthropology the apostle Paul combines the Hebrew and Greek 
conceptions in order to produce a new and perfect conception. 
Taking the psychology of the Greek as a system, he gave the 
central place to the Hebrew ruach or spirit, finding, to use the 
words of Zezschwitz, its " undisturbed centralization in living 
union with the Spirit of God."^ He uses the psychological 
conceptions of the Old Testament, but transforms them for the 
higher purpose of setting forth the strife of the flesh with the 
spirit, and the false position of the psychical nature over against 
the spirit. So also for the first he gives to the world the true 
conception of the conscience as " the remnant of the spirit in 

1 John 11-1^ ; see Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 495 seq. 

2 Dorner, Entwichlungsgeschichte der Lehre von der Person O^m^t, Stuttgart, 
1845, I. p. 64 ; Edin., T. & T. Clark, 1861, pp. 44, 45 ; Schaff, in Lange, Com, 
on John, N. Y., p. 55. 

3 Zezschwitz, Profangrdcitdt, etc., pp. 36 seq 



LANGUAGES OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 73 

the psychical man," 'Hhe divine voice," the consciousness of 
which Socrates felt as the " summit of the knowledge of the 
true wisdom by the Greek spirit." ^ Hence the development 
of the doctrine of sin with its technical terms, and of holiness 
with its new ideas and language. How infinitely deeper and 
higher than the Greek are these conceptions of the New Testa- 
ment language, as the person of Christ, presented by the om- 
nipotent Spirit, convicts the world in respect of sin, and of 
righteousness, and of judgment. ^ The Word as tabernacled 
among us, with glory as of an only begotten from a Father, 
full of grace and faithfulness, ^ assumes the place not only of 
the heroic ideal man of the Greeks, but even of the unapproach- 
able holy Yahweh of the Hebrews. Hence the elevation of the 
graces of meekness, patience, long-suffering, self-sacrifice ; and 
their union with the Greek virtues of strength, beauty, bravery, 
manhood, organize a new ethical ideal. And so in all depart- 
ments of Christian thought there was a corresponding eleva- 
tion and degradation of terms and conceptions. We need only 
mention regeneration, redemption, reconciliation, justification, 
sanctification, life and death, heaven and hell, the Church, the 
Kingdom of God, repentance, faith. Christian love, baptism, 
the Lord's supper, the Lord's day, the advent, the judgment, 
the new Jerusalem, everlasting glory.* Truly a new world 
was disclosed by the Greek language, and the literature of the 
New Testament, as the Hebrew and the Aramaic and the 
Greek combined their energies and capacities in the grasp of 
the divine creating and shaping Spirit, who transformed the 
Greek language and created a new and holy Greek literature 
just as He makes the earth heave and subside into new forms 
and shapes under the energy of the great forces of its advan- 
cing epochs. 

The especial literary development of the New Testament is 
the sermon and the theological tract. We trace these from 
the first beginning on the day of Pentecost through the dis- 

1 Zezschwitz, in Z.c, pp. 55-57, Hatch, in Lc, pp. 94 seq. 

2 John 168. 3 John li*. 

* Bleek, JSinleitung, p. 71 ; Immer, Hermeneutik, p. 105 ; Am. ed., Andover, 
1877, pp. 129-131 ; Cremer, Bib. Theol. Worterbuch der Neu. Testament. 
Grdcitdt ; and Trench, Neio Testament Synonyms, under the respective words. 



74 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

courses of the book of Acts into the epistles. Looking at 
the sermons, we observe that they are no longer on the 
Aramaic and Hebraic model, as are the discourses of our 
Lord, but we see the Greek orator in place of the Aramaic 
rabbin. So with the epistles, especially these of Saint Paul ; 
although he reminds us of the rabbinical schools in his use of 
the halacTia and haggada methods, ^ yet he exhibits also the dia- 
lectic methods of the Greek philosopher. Thus the Greek 
orator and philosopher prepared the language and style of 
Saint Paul, the preacher and theologian, no less than the 
Hebrew prophet and wise man gave him the fundamental prin- 
ciples of his wisdom and experience. And although the* Greek 
literature of the New Testament has no Demosthenes' On the 
Crown^ or Plato's Republic^ as it has no Iliad or Prome- 
theus^ yet it lays the foundation of the sermon and the 
tract, which have been the literary means of a world-transform- 
ing power, as, from the pulpit and the chair. Christian minis- 
ters have stirred the hearts and minds of mankind, and lead 
the van of progress in the Christian world : for the sermon 
combines the prophetic message of the Hebrew with the orator- 
ical force of the Greek, as it tires the heart, strives in the 
council-chamber of the intellect, and pleads at the bar of the 
conscience ; while the epistle combines the sententious wisdom 
of the Hebrew with the dialectic philosophy of the Greek, in 
order to mould and fashion the souls of men and of nations, 
by the great vital and comprehensive principles which consti- 
tute the invincible forces of Christian history. 

1 Gal. 422 seq. ; Eom. 31 seg., etc. See pp. 444 seq. 



CHAPTER IV 

HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 

Holy Scripture is composed of a great variety of writings 
of holy men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in a long 
series extending through many centuries, preserved to us in 
three different original languages, the Hebrew, the Aramaic, 
and the Greek, besides numerous versions. These languages 
were themselves the products of three different civilizations, 
which having accomplished their purpose passed away, the lan- 
guages no longer being used as living speech, but preserved 
only in written documents. They present to us a great variety 
of literature, as the various literary styles and the various liter- 
ary forms of these three languages have combined in this one 
sacred book of the Christian Church, making it as remarkable 
for its literary variety as for its religious unity. 

The Bible is the sacred canon of the Israel of God, the infal- 
lible authority in all matters of worship, faith, and conduct. 
From this point of view it has been studied for centuries by 
Jew and Christian. Pious men in all ages have faithfully 
endeavoured to learn from it the holy will of God and to apply 
it to their daily life. They have used all the resources at the 
disposal of man to gather the sacred material, and employ it 
in the construction of sacred institutions and the formation of 
systems of doctrine and morals. The inevitable tendency has 
been, not only to discern the divine authority in Holy Scripture 
and to recognize the divine teaching therein, but also so to 
exalt the divine element as to underrate or ignore the human 
element in the Bible. The Church in its official utterance has 
kept itself to the normal line of truth; but many of the theolo- 
gians have unduly extended their doctrine of inspiration so as 

75 



76 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

to cover the external letter, the literary form and style, in the 
theory of verbal inspiration, and even to hiclude the method 
of the delivery of the revelation to the sacred writers by the 
theories of divine dictation and the overpowering ecstatic con- 
trol of the Divine Spirit ; and they have so extended the infal- 
lible teaching as to make it include the incidental words of 
weak, ignorant, and wicked men, and even of Satan himself. 

The fact has been too often overlooked,' that it has not seemed 
best to God to create a holy language for the exclusive vehicle 
of His Word, or to constitute peculiar literary forms and styles 
for the expression of His revelation, or to commit the keeping 
of the text of this Word to infallible guardians. But on the 
other hand, as He employed men rather than angels as the 
channels of His revelation, so He used three, human languages 
with all the varieties of literature that had>. been developed in 
the various nations using these languages,' in order that He 
might approach mankind in a more f amilia^^, way in the human 
forms with which they were acquainted ai^ which they could 
readily understand; and He permitted th^ sacred text to de- 
pend for its accuracy upon the attention an J^jeare of the succes- 
sive generations of His people. Hence the necessity of Biblical 
Criticism to determine the true canon, the correct text, and the 
position and character of the various writings. 

Holy Scripture comes down to us through the centuries en- 
veloped in numberless traditional theories and interpretations 
which are too often confounded with Scripture itself. Some- 
times these traditions are expressed in the arrangement of the 
books, the titles given to them, the headings of chapters and 
sections, and other similar editorial work upon the writings 
themselves. But more frequently they envelop the writings 
like a mist of pious sentiment, or a cloud of traditional opinion, 
sometimes in current literature, but oftener in the language of 
the synagogue, the church, and the school ; which is transmitted 
from father to son, or from master to pupil as the genuine 
orthodox opinion. In all those centuries in which religious 
opinion was chiefly traditional, depending on the teaching of 
the Fathers, it is a matter of congratulation that none of these 
traditional theories about the Bible ever received the official 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 7Y 

endorsement of any section of the Christian Church. And the 
diversity of opinion in the several layers of the Talmud and 
among ancient Jewish rabbis shows that liberty of opinion on 
these matters has ever been a heritage of Israel. 

At the revival of learning, when Christian scholars began to 
study the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, under 
the guidance of the most learned Hebrew scholars of their age, 
it became inevitable that, in course of time, if the spirit of the 
Reformation was to endure, all the traditional theories about 
the Bible would eventually have to be tested. 

The free-born spirit of the Reformation was repressed in the 
age of Protestant scholasticism, which built up the systems of 
Protestant dogmatics and ecclesiasticism over against Roman 
Catholic dogmatics and ecclesiasticism. But a terrible retribu- 
tion came upon unfaithful Protestantism in the outbreak of 
free thought in Deism, Atheism, and Rationalism, which laid 
violent hands upon everything that was deemed sacred in 
Christianity, and forced Protestantism from a dogmatic into an 
apologetic position. It was the serious conflicts in this age of 
apologetics which brought to birth the age of modern scientific 
criticism. Criticism sprang forth a youthful giant to solve the 
problems of the modern age of the world. 

All traditions must be tested. Certainty must in some way 
be attained. How can it be attained in the opinion of any 
man save by an intuition of God, or by an infallible decision 
of the ^Church, or by the most exact, painstaking, comprehen- 
sive, and thorough-going investigation ? We cannot look for 
an intuition from God in matters of traditional opinion. There 
is nothing to warrant it. To those who would rest upon the 
infallible authority of the Church, we may say, there has been 
no decision of the Church in matters of Biblical Criticism, and, 
in the divided condition of Christianity at the present time, 
what church can speak with sufficient authority to decide these 
questions ? If the reformers would not submit to the decision 
of the Council of Trent in the all-important question of the 
Canon of Scripture, what council could now speak a decisive 
word as to matters of Biblical Criticism? 

It is manifest, therefore, that the only pathway to certainty 



78 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

in these matters, is the laborious pathway of scientific criticism. 
And let us thank God for this. It removes our Bible from the 
custody of ecclesiastics and scribes, and puts it in the hands of 
the people of God of all nations. Here Hebrew and Christian 
may work in the same workshop and with the same tools. All 
the sects and divisions of Christianity and Judaism, yes, all the 
religions of the world, may come to the same Bible and search 
it with all the powers and resources of genuine scholarship and 
find out for themselves of a certainty whether it is the Book 
of God. 

One would have thought that all truth-seeking men would 
rejoice in an age of criticism. For what is criticism but the 
quest after truth, the test of its certainty and the method of 
its verification ? All honest men should rejoice in every effort 
to make the truth more evident to themselves and more con- 
vincing to others. For the saying of that ancient Jew, Zerub- 
babel, is the watchword of knowledge : " Great is the truth and 
stronger than all things ... it endureth and is strong forever, 
and liveth and prevaileth forever and ever." ^ 

But, in fact, every department of criticism had to be con- 
quered from the ecclesiastics and scholastics, who held scholar- 
ship in subjection to their theories. 

I. What is Criticism? 

Biblical Criticism is one of the departments of Historical 
Criticism as Historical Criticism is one of the divisions of Gen- 
eral Criticism. Criticism is a method of knowledge, and, where- 
ever there is anything to be known, the critical method has its 
place. Knowledge is gained by the use of the faculties of the 
human mind, through sense-perception, the intuitions, and the 
reasoning powers. If these were infallible in their working, 
and their results were always reliable, there would be no need 
of criticism ; but, in fact, these faculties are used by fallible 
men who do not know how to use them, or employ them in 
various degrees of imperfection, so that human knowledge is 
ever a mixture of the true and the false, the reliable and the 

1 1 Esdras 4'^^38. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 79 

unreliable ; and errors of individuals are perpetuated and en- 
hanced by transmission from man to man and from generation 
to generation. Criticism is the test of the certainty of knowledge^ 
the method of its verification. It examines the products of 
human thinking and working, and tests them by the laws of 
thought and the rules of evidence. It eliminates the false, 
the uncertain, and the unsubstantial from the true, the certain, 
and the substantial. 

The unthinking rely upon their own crude knowledge, which 
they have received from their fathers and friends, or acquired 
by their narrow experience, without reflecting upon the uncer- 
tainty necessaril}^ attached to it. But the reflecting mind which 
has experienced the uncertainty of its own acquisitions and of 
those things that have been transmitted to it, cannot rely upon 
anything as really known until it has been tested and found 
reliable by criticism. For criticism reviews the processes of 
thought and the arguments and evidences by which its results 
have been acquired. It studies these products in their genesis, 
examines them carefully in the order of their production, veri- 
fies and corrects them, improves upon them where improve- 
ment is possible, strengthens them where strength is needed, 
but also destroys them when they are found to be worthless, 
misleading, or false, as mere conceits, illusions, or fraudulent 
inventions. 

Criticism is thus on the one side destructive, for its office is 
to detect the false, eliminate it, and destroy it. This is not 
infrequently a painful process to the critic himself, and to those 
who have allowed themselves to be deceived, and who have 
been relying upon the unreliable ; but it is indispensable to 
the knowledge of the truth ; it is the path of safety for the 
intellect and good morals ; it removes the obstructions to prog- 
ress in knowledge. The destruction of an error opens up a 
vision of the truth, as a mote removed from the eye or frost 
brushed from the window. 

Criticism is also constructive. It tests and finds the truth. 
It rearranges truths and facts in their proper order and har- 
mony. In accordance with the strictness of its methods, and 
the thoroughness of their application, will be the certainty of 



80 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the results. But criticism itself, as a human method of know- 
ledge, is also defective and needs self-criticism for its own recti- 
fication, security, and progress. It must again and again verify 
its methods and correct its processes. Eternal vigilance is the 
price of truth as well as of liberty. It improves its methods 
with the advancement of human learning. In the infancy or 
early growth of a nation, or of an individual, or of the world, 
we do not find criticism. It belongs to the manhood and 
maturity of a nation and the world's civilization. 

Criticism requires for its exercise careful training. Only 
those who have learned how to use its tools and have employed 
them with the best masters, and have attained a mastery of the 
departments of knowledge to be criticised, are prepared for the 
delicate and difficult work of criticism ; for knowledge must be 
attained ere it can be tested. Criticism refines the crude oil 
of knowledge. It cleanses and polishes the rough diamond of 
thought. It removes the dross from the gold of wisdom. 
Criticism searches all departments of knowledge, as a torch of 
fire, consuming the hay, straw, and stubble, that the truth of 
God may shine forth in its majesty and certainty as the imper- 
ishable and eternal. No one need fear criticism, save those 
who are uncertain in their knowledge ; for criticism leads to 
certitude. It dissipates doubt. Flat Lux is its watchword. 

We are not surprised that criticism has thus far been largely 
destructive, for there were many errors that had grown up and 
become venerable with age, and were so interwoven and em- 
bedded in systems of philosophy, of theology, of law, of medi- 
cine, and of science, as well as in the manners and customs of 
men, that a long conflict was necessary to destroy them. Men 
in general are more concerned with the maintenance of estab- 
lished positions and systems and of vested interests than they 
are interested in the truth of God and of nature. Scholars, 
when they see the venerable errors, hesitate to destroy them 
for fear of damaging their own interests or those of their 
friends, and sometimes out of anxiety, for the truth, with which 
the error is entangled. But in the providence of God, some 
great doubter like Voltaire, or Hume, or Strauss, or some great 
reformer like Luther or Zwingli, arises to lay violent hands upon 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 81 

the systems in which truth and error are combined, raze them 
to the ground and trample them in the dust, that from the 
ruins the imperishable truth may be gathered up and arranged 
in its proper order and harmony. 

The modern world since the Reformation has become more 
and more critical, until the climax has been reached in our day. 
The destruction of error has been the chief duty of criticism, 
but its constructed work has not been neglected, and this will 
more and more rise into importance in the progress of know- 
ledge. It is not without significance that the age of the world 
most characterized by the spirit of criticism has been the age 
of the most wonderful progress in all departments of human 
knowledge. 

Criticism divides itself into various branches in accordance 
with the departments of knowledge : (1) Philosophical Criti- 
cism; (2) Historical Criticism; and (3) Scientific Criticism. 
Limiting ourselves to Historical Criticism, we distinguish it from 
other criticism, in that it has to do with the materials of the 
past, the sources of the history of mankind ; as Philosophical 
Criticism has to do with the facts of human consciousness, and 
Scientific Criticism with the facts of external nature. Histori- 
cal Criticism deals with the various sources of history : literary 
documents, monuments, laws, customs, institutions, traditions, 
legends, and myths. The great importance of the literary 
sources justifies their separation in the distinct branch of 
Literary Criticism. Biblical Criticism is one of the sections of 
Historical Criticism, as it has to do with Biblical History and 
with Biblical Literature. 

11. The Principles of Criticism 

The principles and methods of Biblical Criticism will thus 
embrace those (1) of General Criticism, (2) of Historical Criti- 
cism, (3) of Literary Criticism, and (4) of Biblical Criticism. 
Biblical Criticism has thus the advantage of all this prelimi- 
nary work in other fields to guide and illustrate its own 
peculiar work. 

1. From General Criticism it derives the fundamental laws 



82 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of thought, which must not be violated, such as the laws of 
identity, of contradiction, of exclusion, and of sufficient reason.^ 

The four fundamental laws of thought are these : 

(1) The Law of Identity is usually expressed thus : a thing is 
what it is, A is A, or A = A. This is a necessary law of self- 
consistent thought. Kant makes it the principle of analytic 
judgment; Hamilton, the law of logical affirmation, or definition. 
There are two kinds of identity, absolute and relative. Errors in 
reasoning under this law are usually in using relative identity as 
if it were absolute. 

(2) The Law of Contradiction may be thus stated : a thing 
cannot be and not be at the same time ; or a thing must either be 
or not be ; or the same attribute cannot at the same time be af- 
firmed and denied of the same subject. This law is called by 
Hamilton the law of non-contradiction. 

(3) The Law of Excluded Middle is as follows : Everything is 
either A or not A ; everything is either a given thing or some- 
thing which is not a given thing. There is no mean between two 
contradictory propositions. If we think a judgment true, we 
must abandon its contradictory ; if false, the contradictory must be 
accepted. This law is a combination of the first and second laws. 

(4) The Law of Sufficient Eeason is that : Every judgment we 
accept must rest upon a sufficient ground or reason. 

It also derives from General Criticism the laws of probation, 
which must be applied to all reasoning. There must be no 
begging of the question at issue, no reasoning backward and 
forward or in a circle, no jumping at conclusions, no setting out 
to prove one thing and then insensibly substituting another 
thing in its place. ^ These laws of probation are the sharp tools 
of the critic with which he tests all the acquisitions of the 
human mind and all the reasonings of scholars in all depart- 
ments of knowledge. 

2. From Historical Criticism Biblical Criticism derives the 
principles of historic genesis. The evidences of history belong 
to the past. They are oral, written, or monumental. They 
passed through several stages before they reached us. They 

1 Sir Wm. Hamilton, Logic^ Boston, 1860, pp. 67, 81 ; also McCosh, Laws 
of Discursive Thought^ N.Y. 1871, pp. 195 seq. ; Thomson, Laiiis of Thought, 
IV. sect. 114; Hyslop, Elements of Logic, N.Y. 1893, pp. 291 seq. 

2 Sir Wm. Hamilton, Logic, p. 369 ; McCosh, Laws of Discursive Thought, 
pp. 183 seq. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 83 

must be traced back to their origin in order to determine 
whether they are genuine ; or whether they have been invented 
as interesting stories for hours of idleness and recreation, 
or as forgeries with the intent to deceive ; or whether there 
is a mingling of these various elements that need to be sepa- 
rated and distinguished.^ 

An example may be found in the story familiar to Presbyterian 
pulpits that George Gillespie uttered the answer to the question 
of the Shorter Catechism, " Wliat is God ? " in prayer when the 
Westminster Assembly was in perplexity how to answer it. This 
story was fathered by Hetherington in his history of the West- 
minster Assembly. And yet this writer of history states in his 
preface that the records of the Westminster Assembly were said 
to be in the Williams Library in London. He wrote a history of 
the Westminster Assembly without taking the trouble to journey 
from Scotland to London to examine the original records of that 
Assembly. What basis has that story in fact ? None whatever ! 
(1) The official Eecords of the Westminster Assembly show that 
George Gillespie left the Assembly and returned to Scotland 
months before the Assembly began its work on the Shorter Cate- 
chism. He was not present at the time and therefore could not 
have made such a prayer. 

(2) furthermore, the answer was not taken from any one's 
prayer. The records show that this answer of the Shorter Cate- 
chism was condensed from the answer of the ' Larger Catechism, 
and that the answer of the Larger Catechism was made on the 
basis of the Catechism of Herbert Palmer, the chairman of the 
Committee of the Westminster Assembly having this matter in 
charge, with sundry improvements from other well-known Cate- 
chisms of the time.^ 

The order and processes of the development of the material 
must be considered in order to determine its integrity, or how 
far it has been modified by external influences or the struggle 
of internal inconsistencies, and how far the earlier and the 
later elements may be distinguished and the excrescences 
removed from the original. 

I may use Gillespie again to illustrate the growth of a legend, 
in the heaping upon one man the honor due to several, and also of 

1 Gieseler, Text-Book of Church History, N.Y. 1857, I. p. 23. 

2 Briggs, Documentary History of the Westminster Assembly, Presbytenan 
Beview, 1880, pp. 155 seq. 



84 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

substituting a subordinate in place of the principal hero of an 
occasion. I shall quote from the Presbyterian historian, Dr. 
Mitchell. 

" The question of the autonomy of the Church came up first in 
the Westminster Assembly when its members were preparing the 
Propositions concerning Church-government, of which an account 
was given in my last lecture, and it was then that that far-famed 
single combat between Selden and Gillespie took place round which 
later Scottish tradition has thrown such a halo. The manuscript 
minutes coincide with Lightfoot's Journal in assigning Gillespie's 
speech not to the session of 20th, but to that of 21st February. 
In Gillespie's own notes it is introduced at the close of the ac- 
count of the former session with the words, ' I reply,' not ' I 
replied,' and may simply embody a brief outline of the reply he 
was to make on the following day. The reply made to Selden on 
the spur of the moment was that of Herle, who in 1646 succeeded 
Dr. Twisse as Prolocutor, and judging even from the fragmentary 
jottings preserved by By field, one cannot doubt that it was a very 
able reply. Gillespie and Young appear to have taken the evening 
to arrange their thoughts, and at next session made very telling 
replies, the former to the general line of argument, the latter to 
the citations from Eabbinical and patristic authorities." ^ 

The character of the material must be studied in order to 
determine how far it is reliable and trustworthy ; whether it 
is in accordance with the experience of mankind, and so nat- 
ural ; or contrary to that experience, and so unnatural or 
supernatural ; whether it is in harmony with itself and consist- 
ent with its own conditions and circumstances ; whether there 
are disturbing influences that determine the material so as to 
warp or colour it and how far these influences extend. ^ 

The value of the materials of history depends upon such 
considerations as these ; also upon the nearness or remoteness 
of the material to the matters concerning which they render 
testimony ; upon the extent and variety of evidence, if that 
extent and variety are primitive and not derived from an origi- 
nal source upon which they all depend. The consistency and 
persistence of materials are also evidences of vitality and 
inherent strength of evidence. 

1 A. F. Mitchell, The Westminster Assembly, 1883, pp. 287, 288. 

2 See Droysen, Grundriss der HistorUc, Leipzig, 1868, pp. 16, 17. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 85 

The sources of history that cannot bear this criticism are 
not reliable sources. The application of these simple tests 
removes from the pages of history numberless legends, fables, 
and myths, and determines the residuum of truth and fact that 
underlies them. It is distressing to part with the sweet stories 
which have been told us in our early life, and which have been 
handed down by the romancers from the childhood and youth 
of our race. We may still use them as stories, as products 
of the imagination, but we dare not build on them as historic 
verities. As men we must know the truth. We cannot afford 
to deceive ourselves or others. 

Many of these legends and traditions have strongly intrenched 
themselves and lie like solid rocks in the path of historic investi- 
gation. They must be exploded to get at the truth ; and this 
cannot be done without noise and confusion, and outcries of 
alarm from the weak and timid, and those who are interested 
in the maintenance of error and court popularity by an appeal 
to prejudices. Sometimes these traditions may be overcome 
by positive evidence obtained by careful research in ancient 
documents, and by parallel lines of evidence. But it is not 
always possible to obtain sufficient external positive evidence. 
Sometimes we have to rely upon a long-continued and unbroken 
silence, and sometimes we have to challenge the tradition and 
reject it from sheer lack of evidence and the suspicious circum- 
stances of its origin and growth. 

3. From Literary Criticism Biblical Criticism derives its 
chief principles and methods. As literature it must first be 
considered as text. The Principles of Textual Criticism have 
been worked out in the study of the texts of the literature of 
Greece and Rome, and of the ecclesiastical writers. Biblical 
Textual Criticism has to determine the correct text of Holy 
Scripture ; that is, the writings as composed of letters, words, 
sentences, chapters, books, and collections of books. It has 
nothing to do with their contents except so far as these may 
help in its more formal work. 

(a) Textual Criticism first collects all the original manu- 
scripts, endeavours to ascertain when they were written, in 
what country and by what school of scribes. Then it arranges 



86 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

them in families so as to determine their genealogies, and thus 
it gets at the parent manuscripts, those of primary authority. ^ 
These are carefully compared in order to determine where 
they agree and where they differ, their consensus and their 
dissensus ; and when they disagree, to determine which was 
the original reading. 

(5) Textual Criticism next examines the ancient transla- 
tions of the Scriptures ; for these give evidence as to the 
original readings which they translated. 

((?) The textual critic next betakes himself to the citations 
of the Bible in ancient writers. These are sometimes earlier 
than the Versions or even than the Manuscripts. They give 
important evidence as to the originals from which these cita- 
tions were made in the different periods of the history of 
Christian literature and Rabbinical literature. 

(d ) The citations of the Scriptures in the Scriptures them- 
selves are also of very great importance ; for although they 
are often loose and paraphrastic in their character, they yet 
not infrequently give evidence as to the original text which 
they cite. 

I shall venture to give, as an illustration, a legion of Jesus, 
which exhibits very clearly the several principles given above. 
The original logion in the Hebrew Logia of Saint Matthew was in 
all probability 

He who putteth away his wife committeth adultery : 
She who putteth away her husband committeth adultery. 

The couplet is a trimeter,^ and the parallelism is complete word 
for word throughout. 

(a) This was cited in Mk. lO^^-^^- 

Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery 
against her : 

And if she herself shall put away her husband, and marry another, she com- 
mitteth adultery. 

The Hebrew participle is, as not infrequently, translated into 
Greek as a relative clause. In both lines of the couplet "and 

1 See Scrivener in I.e., pp. 404 seq. Westcott and Hort deserve great credit 
for their elaboration of this principle in I.e., pp. 39 seq. ^ gee pp. 376 seq. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 87 

marry another" is inserted. This changes the emphasis of the 
prohibition from separation to remarriage. Besides, in the first 
line the adultery is made more specifically a sin against the wife. 
In addition the measure of the lines of gnomic poetry and the 
parallelism are disturbed. 

(6) Matthew 19^ cites from Mark only the first of these lines : 

Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry 
another, committeth adultery. 

It omits the specification "against her," but cites in other 
respects entirely. Only it gives an additional clause "except 
for fornication," which limits the universal prohibition of separa- 
tion, of the original logion, and of remarriage, of Mark's exposi- 
tion, and gives an exceptional case when separation and remarriage 
would not be unlawful. 

(c) Matthew 5^^ cites directly from the Logia : 

Every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, 
maketh her an adulteress. 

Here Matthew renders the Hebrew participle by the G-reek 
participle. It makes the same insertion, "saving for the cause 
of fornication," as in its citation from Mark, except that it uses 
TrapcKTo? Xoyov for fxr] iiru But it also changes the person in the 
last half of the line, so that the one who puts away his wife, 
instead of committing the act of adultery himself, causes his 
wife to commit adultery ; that is, by compelling her to seek refuge 
with another man. It is noteworthy that Matthew here is nearer 
to the' logion by its omission of the remarriage. It should also 
be mentioned that in the two passages of Matthew a later hand 
has added the clause " and he that marrieth her when she is put 
away committeth adultery," which may be regarded as a late 
ecclesiastical addition due to the influence of Lk. 16^^. 

(d) Luke 16^^ also cites directly from the Hebrew logion : 

Every one that putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth 

adultery : 
And he that marrieth one that is put away from a husband committeth 

adultery. 

Luke thus gives the logion complete. He retains the participial 
form in the Greek, but he agrees with Mark in inserting remar- 
riage. He knows nothing of the exceptional " fornication," which 
is evidently peculiar to Matthew and due to it alone. The 
peculiarity of this passage is the change of person in the second 
line. This is possibly due to Luke's pointing the Hebrew original 
as a passive instead of as an active participle. 



88 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

(e) The apostle Saint Paul also cites this logion of the Lord 
in 1 Cor. 7^'-'^ : 

But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, That the wife 
depart not from her husband (but and if she depart, let her remain 
unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband) ; and that the husband 
leave not his toife. 

Saint Paul is here citing from the original Hebrew logion in the 
italicized clauses, and agrees with it in laying the stress on sep- 
aration. He makes no reference to adultery, and inserts his own 
qualifications. 

Furthermore, Saint Paul, like our gospel of Matthew, gives an 
exception. The exception of Matthew is fornication ; the exception 
of Saint Paul is wilful desertion : " Yet if the unbelieving depart- 
eth, let him depart ; the brother or the sister is not under bondage 
in such cases ; but God hath called us in peace" (ver.^^). 

There are also errors in translation which arise from lack 
of knowledge of the original, or inability to give adequate 
expression to the idea of the original, save by paraphrase, and 
in defective judgment as to the best way of rendering it. 
Errors in citation arise from slips of the memory and the 
desire to use a part and not the whole of the passage, or 
the adaptation of it to circumstances beyond the scope of 
the original. 

(e) When the biblical critic has exhausted all these external 
evidences, he still confronts many questions unsolved, many 
doubtful readings. Must he halt here ? By no means. Textual 
Criticism is a science. There are laws which determine the 
transmission of all literature. It has been determined by care- 
ful induction in those investigations what are the sources of 
error, those mistakes which are natural to inexactness of vision, 
hearing, and penmanship : such as in words of similar sound, in 
letters of like form, in the repetition of words in passing from 
line to line, in the omission or insertion of clauses by slips of 
the eye, and in the transfer of explanatory notes from the 
margin to the text. The experienced textual critic is keen to 
detect these errors, and to remove them even from the earliest 
manuscripts. He is aware of the tendency of scribes to uncon- 
sciously substitute the known for the unknown, the familiar 
for the unfamiliar, or by explanatory inarginal notes to make 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 89 

conjectural corrections which in time exchange places with the 
original text, or crowd the original readings into forget fulness. 
The trained critic well knows that pedantry, traditionalism, 
and literalism — common characteristics of scribes — misled 
them into errors of a different character, but no less serious 
than those which arose from rapid reading and copying by 
other scribes. The internal sense is often a safer guide than 
the external letter, especially in manuscripts which are defec- 
tive and difficult to read. There are also errors in the text 
due to the wear and tear of manuscripts in their use, and by 
exposure to the carelessness of men and the destructive forces 
of inclement nature. These render the manuscripts illegible, 
indistinct, or mutilated, and great caution and experience and 
often real genius are needed to restore them.^ 

(/) When Textual Criticism has exhausted all its processes 
and has contributed all the wealth of its experience to the 
solution of the difficulties of ancient readings, there still remain 
problems which it cannot solve by its own unaided resources. 
To the solution of these it looks up to its sisters, — the Higher 
Criticism, the Historical Criticism, and Biblical Theology, 
which in their higher work often throw great light upon the 
dark problems of the Lower Criticism. 

The value of the manuscripts having been determined, we are 
prepared to examine the relative value of the readings. The 
principles on which this is done are : (1) The reading which 
lies at the root of all the variations and best explains them 
is to be preferred. (2) The most difficult reading is more 
likely to be correct from the natural tendency of the scribe 
to make his text as easy and intelligible as possible, and the 
natural process of simplification in transmission. ^ (3) The 
reading most in accordance with the context, and especially 
with the style and usage of the author and his times, is to be 

1 See Cappellus, Critica Sacra, 1650, Lib. I. ; Scrivener, Introduction to the 
Criticism of the New Testament, 1874, pp. 7 seq. ; Isaac Taylor, History of the 
Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times, new edition, Liverpool, 
1879, p. 22 ; also Westcott and Hort, Xeiu Testament in the Original Greek, 
Vol. II., Introduction, N.Y. 1882, pp. 5 seq. 

2 These two principles are combined by Westcott and Hort in I.e., pp. 22 seq., 
under the term " transcriptional probability." 



90 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

preferred. This is on the principle of consistency and " intrin- 
sic probability. " ^ 

These illustrations will suffice. 

1. There are three citations of a logion of Jesus in Mt. 5^^^, 
m-% Mk. 9^^^. 

(a) Matthew's gospel cites from the logion thus : 

And if tliy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it 

from thee : 
Eor it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish ; 
And not thy whole body be cast into Gehenna. 
And if thy right hand causeth thee to stumble, cut if off and cast it 

from thee, 
For it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish ; 
And not thy whole body go into Gehenna. — Mt. 529-30, 

Here it is evident there are two strophes of a Hebrew logion, 
of three symmetrical lines each. But some of the lines are too 
long for the measure. 

(b) Mark cites from the same Logion : 

And if thy hand ca.use thee to stumble, cut it off : 
For it is good for thee to enter into life maimed, 

Rather than having thy two hands to go into Gehenna, into the unquenchable 
fire. 

And if thy foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off : 

It is good for thee to enter into life halt. 

Rather than having thy two feet to be cast into Gehenna. 

And if thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out : 
It is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, 
Rather than having two eyes to be cast into Gehenna, where their worm 
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. — Mk. 9'*3-48_ 

It is evident that Mark gives three strophes instead of two, of 
the same number of lines. Sometimes the measures have been 
destroyed by added lines, but in the main the lines have better 
measures than Mt. 5^-^°. 

(c) The second passage in Matthew is, as the context shows, a 
•citation from Mark : 

And if thy hand or thy foot causeth thee to stumble, cut it off and cast it 

from thee : 
It is good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt. 
Rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire. 
And if thine eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out and cast it from thee : 

1 See Westcott and Hort, in I.e., pp. 20 seq. Scrivener expands these princi- 
ples to seven in number in I.e., pp. 436 seq. ; Davidson, Treatise of Biblical Criti- 
cism, Boston, 1853, pp. 386 seq., gives principles of Textual Criticism for the Old 
Testament. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 91 

It is good for thee to enter into life with one eye, 

Rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire. — Mt. 188-9. 

It is evident that Matthew has here condensed the first and 
second strophes of Mark and given the third. 

We have now to determine the original logion that lies back of 
these two stages of transmission. 

There can be no doubt that the original was three strophes of 
three lines each, and that a logion so symmetrical in lines and 
strophes was also symmetrical in measures of lines. 

It is easy to remove the explanatory additions. Mark adds to 
Gehenna, in the first triplet, the explanatory " into the unquench- 
able fire"; and to the third, "where their worm dieth not, and 
the fire is not quenched." Matthew, in its second version, sub- 
stitutes " everlasting fire " for Gehenna, and in the third triplet 
enlarges Gehenna into " Gehenna of fire." It is evident that 
these changes were all made to explain the Hebrew Gehenna to 
Gentile readers. They come from the evangelists, and not from 
Jesus. There can be no doubt that in all these cases only Gehenna 
was used in the original logion. So in the antithesis Mark sub- 
stitutes for life, in the third triplet, the explanatory " kingdom of 
God." Furthermore, Matthew in its first version gives "right 
hand " for hand, and " right eye " for eye. It is now plain what 
the original logion was from which these three texts were derived : 

1. If thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it off : 
It is better for thee maimed to enter into life, 
Than to have two hands and be cast into Gehenna. 

2. And if thy foot cause thee to stumble, cut it off : 
It is better for thee halt to enter into life, 
Than to have two feet and be cast into Gehenna. 

3. And if thine eye cause thee to stumble, cast it out : 
It is better for thee with one eye to enter into life, 
Than to have two eyes and be cast into Gehenna. 

2. In the difference of reading of the Song of David, 2 Sam. 22^^ 
Ps. 18^1, we have in the Psalm i^TI, and in Samuel ^^n^. The 
former is a rare word ; the latter, a common one. It would be 
natural for a copyist to change i^^^l to J<*n^1, but not the reverse. 
Moreover, the more difficult form gives the best sense: "And 
darted on the wings of the wind." The other rendering would be, 
" He appeared on the wings of the wind." Moreover, Deut. 28^^ 
favors the Psalter. 

3. 2 Samuel 22^ reads nntl?^ where Ps. 18^ reads '^bDH. The 
former is right, as we see by the context. 



92 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

5. For breakers of death compassed me, 
And the streams of Belial made me afraid. 

6. The cords of Sheol were round about me : 
The snares of death came upon me. 

In Psalm 18 the copyist has unconsciously repeated ^^ cords " 
by slip of the eye from ver. 6. 

4. Having secured the best text of the writings, criticism 
devotes itself to the higher task of considering them as to 
integrity, authenticity, literary form, and reliability. This is 
appropriately called Higher Criticism. This branch of criti- 
cism has established its principles and methods of work.^ 

It is named the Higher Criticism because it is higher in its 
order and in its work than the Lower or Textual Criticism. 
This department of criticism has lived and worked under this 
name for more than a century. It is not likely that it will 
change its name to accommodate the prejudices of the ignorant, 
or to justify the misrepresentations of the anti-critics. 

The Higher Criticism devotes its attention to the literary 
features of the Bible. It has four great questions to answer. 

(1) As to the integrity of the writings. 

Is the writing the work of a single author, as Browning's 
Hing and the Booh; or is it a collection of writings of different 
authors, as the new Anglican Lux Mundi f Is it in its original 
condition, as the Westminster Shorter Catechism; or has it 
been edited and interpolated by later writers, as the Apostles' 
Creed and the Westminster Confession? May the parts be 
discriminated, the original form of the writing determined, and 
the different steps in interpolation and editing clearly traced ; 
as the successive layers of the Talmuds and the several official 
editions of the Book of Common Prayer ? Or is this a difficult 
and delicate process ; as in the recently discovered Teaching 
of the Apostles^ or in that wonderful collection of Oriental 
tales. The Thousand and One Nights? All these varieties of 
literary work are common in the world's literature, why not in 

1 Thus the learned Roman Catholic, Du Pin, in the introduction to his mag- 
nificent work on ecclesiastical writers, gave an admirable statement of them 
with reference to those ecclesiastical writers before the Higher Criticism of the 
Scriptures had fairly begun. Nouvelle Bihliotlieque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiqties, 
Paris, 1694 ; Hew History of Ecclesiastical Writers, London, 1696. 



HOLY SCRIPTUKE AND CRITICISM 93 

the Bible ? How can we know until we have examined the 
question whether the book of Isaiah is the work of a single 
author in the reign of Hezekiah, or whether it is a collection of 
writings of different prophets gathered about the prophecies of 
Isaiah as the most important nucleus ? It is necessary for the 
critic to determine whether the Psalter is in its original condi- 
tion or whether we may not trace a series of minor psalters 
going through the hands of man}^ different editors until at 
length the present Psalter was produced as the crown of many 
centuries of prayer and praise in Israel. 

(2) As to the authenticity of the loritings. 

Is the writing anonymous like most of the editorials in our 
newspapers and so much of the epistolary advice of our self- 
constituted friends and counsellors? Is it pseudonymous, 
where the author wishes to disguise his hand from fear of per- 
secution, as in the Martin Marprelate tracts ; or to instruct as a 
prophet in the guise of antiquity, as in the Apocalypse of 
Barueh ; or to gain an unbiassed hearing to unpalatable truths, 
as in the Letters of Junius ; or to speak slanderous words with- 
out the peril of detection, as in the pamphlet literature of poli- 
tical and ecclesiastical controversies; or to hide the blushes of 
modest beginners in literature ? 

Or does the writing bear the author's name ; and if so, is it 
genuine ? Did it come from the author himself ? Or is it the 
conjecture of a later editor, as in the assignment to Gerson of 
the De Imitatione Qhristi? Is it a forgery, as the Epistles of 
Phalarisf Or does the writing bear a name which has been 
suggested by its contents ? May not the proper name attached 
to the book be the name of the hero or the heroine of the story, 
or the name which the author has chosen to honor b}^ the pro- 
duction of his pen ? All these methods of attaching names to 
writings are common in the world's literature. We must ask 
these questions of the writings contained in the Bible. How 
did the name of Moses become attached to the Pentateuch ? Is 
there any valid ground for it in the Pentateuch itself, or in any 
original title ; or has it come from a late, and unreliable con- 
jecture ? Is Malachi the name of the prophet, or a pseudonym, 
as Calvin supposed? Are the books of Daniel and Ecclesiastes 



94 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

pseudonymous, as modern critics suppose, or were these writings 
really written by Daniel and Solomon ? Did Ruth and Esther 
write these books, or are they simply the heroines of these 
stories ? What is the meaning of the proper names in the titles 
of the Psalms ? Such are the numerous questions which arise 
under the head of authenticity in the study of the Hebrew 
Scriptures. 

(3) As to literary features. 

What is the style of the author and his method of compo- 
sition ? Does he write in poetry or in prose ? What kind 
of poetry does he produce ; lyric, gnomic, dramatic, or epic 
poetry ? What is the measurement of his lines ? How does he 
arrange his strophes ? Or if he writes prose, is it history, ora- 
tory, the epistle, or the treatise ? Is he easy and graceful, or 
rapid and brilliant, or steady and forceful, or slow and dull, or 
stiff and pedantic ? What are the characteristics which distin- 
guish him from other authors ? These questions are familiar to 
students of the world's literature. Literary critics have to 
answer them. The biblical critic cannot escape them simply 
because the biblical writers are said to be Moses and David, 
Solomon and Isaiah ; or because we believe that the Divine 
Spirit Himself speaks to us in these writings ; for they contain 
different varieties of prose and poetical style. The discovery 
of the principles of Hebrew poetry by Bishop Lowth made a 
revolution in our knowledge of the psalmists, the wise men, and 
the prophets. It makes an immense difference whether the 
early chapters of Genesis are poetry or prose. A comparison 
of the styles of the chronicler and the prophetic historians 
enables us to form a far better judgment upon the value of 
their history and its lessons than we otherwise could. The 
whole interpretation of Job, Esther, Ruth, and Jonah depends 
upon whether we regard them as historical narratives, or as 
essentially works of the imagination. All of these literary 
questions will be asked of the biblical books whether we wish 
it or not. That man is not a biblical scholar who hesitates to 
ask them, out of fear lest his traditional opinions may be im- 
perilled. Such a man, though he may be studying the Bible, 
so far as it is possible through the coloured glasses set in the 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 95 

rigid frames he has imposed upon his eyes, is yet not a sincere 
biblical student, for he declines to open his eyes in the sunlight 
of divine truth. 

(4) As to the credibility of the writings. 

We are obliged as biblical critics after we hare determined 
all these preliminary questions of the Higher Criticism to face 
the most serious question of credibility. Literary critics are 
compelled to ask these questions in their study of the world's 
literature. Is the writing reliable ? Do its statements accord 
with the truth, or are they coloured and warped by prejudice, 
superstition, or reliance upon insufficient or unworthy testi- 
mony? What character does the author bear as to prudence, 
good judgment, fairness, integrity, and critical sagacity ? Bib- 
lical critics cannot shut their eyes to these questions of criti- 
cism. Whatever may be their reverence of Holy Scripture 
they must ask these questions of it. The reverent critics will 
ask these questions reverently. Rationalistic critics will ask 
them soberly and impartially. Critics whose aim it is to dis- 
pute the divine authority of Holy Scripture will be irreverent 
and unfair. The spirit of the investigation is determined by 
the temper and character of the investigators, not by its princi- 
ples and methods, which are the same to all scientific students 
of the Bible. The investigation must go on. It matters little 
how many oppose it. Opposition may delay the end ; it can- 
not prevent it. It may make the investigation a holy war and 
the establishment of its results a catastrophe to the faith and 
life of its opponents. But the normal development of the 
investigation is the calm, steady, invincible march of science. 

The Higher Criticism has its scientific principles by Avhich 
it determines all these questions.^ 

(1) The writing must be in accordance with its supposed his- 
toric position as to time and place and circumstances. 

A writing is the product of the experience of the author or 
editor. It could not be produced without that experience. 
The historic writings of the world are born, not made. They 

1 A brief statement of these principles is presented in relation to Biblical 
Criticism by Professor Henry P. Smith, in his article on the " Critical Theories 
of Julius Wellhausen," Presbyterian Beview^ 1882, III. p. 370. 



96 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

could not be born before the time. When born they show the 
marks of their parentage and the times of their birth. 

" Time is one of the most certain proofs ; for nothing more evi- 
dently shows that a book cannot belong to that time wherein 
it is pretended to have been written, than when we find in it 
some marks of a later date. These marks, in the first place, are 
false dates; for 'tis an ordinary thing for impostors, that are 
generally ignorant, to date a book after the death of the author 
to whom they ascribe it, or of the person to whom it is dedicated, 
or written ; and even when they do fix the time right, yet they often 
mistake the names of the consuls, or in some other circumstances : 
All which are invincible proofs that he that dated this book did not 
live at that time. Secondly, impostors very often speak of men that 
lived long after the death of those persons to whom they attribute 
those spurious discourses, or they relate the history of some pas- 
sages that happened afterwards, or they speak of cities and people 
that were unknown at the time, when those authors wrote." ^ 

Dr. Henry M. Dexter has recently shown that the records pub- 
lished a few years ago in England as the records of the Baptist 
Church of Crowle, 1599-1620, were forgeries, by the heaping up 
of references in these records to men and events long subsequent 
to those times.^ 

But this principle may be used in a positive argument. A few 
years ago I discovered a letter in the Hunterian jMuseum, Glas- 
gow, giving the names of all the magistrates, churches, and min- 
isters of ^N'ew England, when the letter was written. The letter 
was a copy and not the original. It was -onsigned ; it had no 
address ; there was no external evidence except the fact that it 
had been in this collection of American books, tracts, and manu- 
scripts for a long time, and came from a reliable source, making 
its genuineness altogether probable. By a careful study of the 
names of persons and places, and of the events described in this 
letter, I was able to determine that the letter was written by John 
Eliot, the apostle to the American Indians, not earlier than May 
22nd, 1650, nor later than June 5th, 1650, that is within the narrow 
limits of two weeks. No one has ever questioned these results 
of my higher criticism of this document.^ 

This principle when applied to the writings of Holy Script- 
ure leads to sure results. As surely as the different geological 

1 Du Pin, New History of Ecclesiastical Writers^ 3d edit., corrected, London, 
1696, pp. vii. seq. ^ jqi^^i Smythe, the Se Baptist, Boston, 1887. 

3 Briggs, American Prcshyterianism, Appendix, xxix.-xxxvi, N.Y., 1885. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 97 

epochs leave their traces on the strata of the rocks, and the 
astronomical epochs are disclosed in the revolutions of the heav- 
enly bodies, so surely literature reflects the history of the times 
which gave it birth. A biblical writing could not be born 
before its time any more than any other writing. Holy Script- 
ure bears upon it the traces of its historic origin as truly as 
any other scripture. Higher Criticism may determine the his- 
toric origin and development of the writings of Holy Scripture 
by these traces as surely as in any other department of the 
world's literature. We may not always be able to detect the 
historic origin of the book, but to find it is like the dawn of 
the sun after a cloudy night. 

(2) Differences of style imply differences of experience and 
age of the same author; or^ when sufficiently greats differences of 
author and of period of composition. 

'' In short, stile is a sort of touch stone, that discovers the truth 
or falsehood of books ; because it is impossible to imitate the stile 
of any author so perfectly as that there will not be a great deal 
of difference. By the stile, we are not only to understand the 
bare words and terms, which are easily imitated; but also the 
turn of the discourse, the manner of writing, the elocution, 
the figures, and the method : All which particulars, it is a diffi- 
cult matter so to counterfeit as to prevent a discovery. There 
are, for instance, certain authors, whose stile is easily known, and 
which it is impossible to imitate : We ought not, however, always 
to reject a book upon a slight difference of stile, without any 
other proofs ; because it often happens that authors write differ- 
ently, in different times : Neither ought we immediately to re- 
ceive a book as genuine, upon the bare resemblance of stile, when 
there are other proofs of its being spurious ; because it may so 
happen, that an ingenious man may sometimes counterfeit the 
stile of an author, especially in discourses which are not very 
long. But the difference and resemblance of stile may be so 
remarkable sometimes, as to be a convincing proof, either of truth 
or falsehood." ^ 

This principle has been so firmly established that no one can 
intelligently deny it. Style is the dress of thought, or rather 
the expressions of its face and the graceful movement of its 
form. Every human being has his individuality of face and 

1 l.c.^ p. viii. 



98 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

form, his characteristic movements and expression by which he 
is distinguished and known from others. Every writer has his 
handwriting. Even the typewriter does not destroy these dif- 
ferences. Every writer has his stock of words, his favourite ex- 
pressions, the phrases of his family, or his school, or his party, 
his attitude of mind, his pose of statement, his characteristic 
utterances ; and if in his quest of truth he has gained such an 
advancement as to be a writer of documents which live through 
the centuries, his powers of speech and writing have expanded 
to the work required of them and they have expressed these 
advanced conceptions in language which would not be appro- 
priate if it were not in a true sense original, and as peculiar to 
the man as his thinking and acting. It is quite true that the 
style of writers grows as they grow in knowledge and experi- 
ence, and the earlier writings of an author may be readily dis- 
tinguished from his later writings. But throughout his entire 
literary development there will be a unity and an identity of 
character in his style which will mark him off from all other 
writers as truly as his face and its expressions are different from 
every other face and ever remain characteristic from infancy to 
old age. 

It is quite true that it is more difhcult to detect difference of 
style than difference of face. Experience in criticism as well 
as accuracy and careful investigation are required for such 
criticism. Not every tyro is capable of it. And if an un- 
trained critic or an amateur fail in the necessary discrimina- 
tions, that is no test of their reality, or of their accuracy when 
seen by the experienced eye and traced by the expert hand. 
Mistakes are made in faces and forms even by detectives. Mis- 
takes are more likely to occur in the delicate traceries of lit- 
erature. But mistakes do not disprove the importance of a 
detective agency. Still less do they disprove the value of lit- 
erary criticism. They teach that those who enter upon such 
investigations should get the training that is necessary, acquire 
by experience the talents of experts, and use their delicate 
tools with refinement and taste, scientific accuracy, and thorough- 
ness, and with a confidence in the truth they are seeking to 
determine. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 99 

Any one familiar with literature knows how difficult it is for 
a well-known writer to disguise his hand. It will often be recog- 
nized through all disguises even by those who are not experts. 
This principle has been successfully applied in many genera- 
tions of criticism to all departments of the world's literp.ture. 
It has also been applied to the writings of Holy Scripture with 
the most fruitful results. It needs no training to see that each 
one of the evangelists has a different style. It needs no ex- 
pert's knowledge to distinguish that the Chronicler writes dif- 
ferently from the prophetic historians. But it does need the 
professional critic to tell you what those differences are, to 
tabulate them and use them as evidences for the determination 
of questions of the integrity, authorship, style, and credibility 
of these writings. 

(3) Differences of opinion and conception imply differences 
of author when these are sufficiently great^ and also differences of 
period of composition. 

" The opinions or things contained in a book, do likewise discover 
the forgery of it: (1) When we find some opinions there, that 
were not maintained till a long time after the author, whose name 
it bears. (2) When we find some terms made use of, to explain 
these doctrines, which were not customary till after his death. 
(3) When the author opposes errors, as extant in his own time, that 
did not spring up till afterwards. (4) When he describes cere- 
monies, rites, and customs that were not in use in his time. (5) 
When we find some opinions in these spurious discourses, that 
are contrary to those that are to be found in other books, which 
unquestionably belong to that author. (6) When he treats of 
matters that were never spoken of in the time when the real 
author was alive. (7) When he relates histories that are mani- 
festly fabulous." ^ 

This is a principle of great simplicity and of far-reaching con- 
sequences. There is a gradual development of thought in this 
world of ours. Each age has its opinions, each writer his point 
of view. The views of the relation of Church and State which 
are embedded in the American official copy of the Westminster 
Confession could not have been written before the American 
Revolution. Even if the history of the revision of the Confes- 

1 Z.c, p. viii. 



100 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

sion had been lost and long forgotten, the fact of the revision 
would lie in the language of the document itself. The Augs- 
burg Confession could not have been composed before the birth 
of the great Reformation. If the external history of its compo- 
sition had been lost, the internal evidence would be sufficient 
to show it. The Emancipation Proclamation was born of the 
crisis of the American Civil War. When else could it have 
been composed ? 

It is true that tradition is always at work fathering anonymous 
writings with ancient venerated names. An interesting example 
is found in the paradoxes of Herbert Palmer, which have been 
attributed to Lord Bacon and are found in many editions of 
his printed works. The finding of several editions of a little 
book containing these paradoxes under the name of Herbert Palmer 
was sufficient external evidence to enable Dr. Grossart to re- 
move them from Bacon's works. But the external evidence is not 
always attainable. Take for example the famous sentence fathered 
so long on Augustine : " In necessary things unity, in unnecessary 
things liberty, in all things charity.''^ A little reflection ought to 
have convinced any student of the history of opinion that Augus- 
tine could not in his age of the world either have expressed or 
understood such a sentence. Critical scholars long refused it to 
Augustine on that account. But it was not until recent times that 
the full evidence of the origin of this word of peace was found in 
a tract of Rupertus Meldenius in the earl}^ days of the irenic 
movement in the first half of the seventeenth century. 

Having determined the characteristic doctrine of a period and 
the leading features of an author, it is not easy for an expert 
critic to mistake in his judgment as to any other writing of that 
author or period. This is a more difficult line of investigation 
at the present time because few scholars have worked at it in 
the Hebrew Scriptures, but it is the most convincing when the 
facts have been tabulated and their lessons learned. 

(4) Citations shotv the dependence of the author upon the 
author or authors cited^ ivhere these are definite and the identity 
of the author cited can he clearly established. 

Sometimes these citations are clear and strong evidence and 
so decide our question beyond reason of a doubt. At other 
times there is grave difficulty. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 101 

An illustration of this principle and its difficulties may be given 
in the story of tracing the maxim of peace to E-upertus Meldenius. 
A distinguished German, Lticke/ found this word of peace in a 
tract of great rarity which bore the name of Eupertus Meldenius. 
He refers to its use by Richard Baxter, but affirms that Baxter no- 
where mentions the source from which he derived it. However, 
he traces it from Baxter backward to this early tract of the seven- 
teenth century and makes it probable that Rupertus Meldenius 
wrote it. But soon after another G-erman scholar discovered an- 
other rare tract of the same period by George Franc, in which the 
same thought is expressed in similar terms,^ and this somewhat 
weakens the argument for the origin of the phrase in RuxDcrtus 
Meldenius. It was my good fortune to make this probable evi- 
dence certain by finding accidentally in a rare tract of Richard 
Baxter a passage which had been overlooked by all previous schol- 
ars, in which Baxter attributes the phrase to Rupertus Meldenius 
and in which he states that he derived it from a citation in a work 
of Conrad Berg. This work of Conrad Berg is so rare that only 
one copy of it is known to be in existence. But after some diffi- 
culty I found this copy in the Royal Library at Berlin, saw the 
passage from which Baxter derived it, saw that it was part of a 
long citation from Rupertus Meldenius, compared the citation 
Avith the original tract, and so made the evidence complete.^ 

These four principles are embraced under the internal evi- 
dence. To them we must now add two principles of external 
evidence. 

(5) Positive testimony as to the writing in other writings of 
acknowledged authority ; 

(6) The silence of authorities as to the writing in question. 
These are combined by Du Pin : 

" The external proofs are, in the first place, taken from ancient 
manuscripts; in which either we do not find the name of an 
author: or else we find that of another- The more ancient or 
correct they are, the more we ought to value them. Secondly, 
from the testimony or silence of ancient authors ; from their testi- 
mony, I say, when they formally reject a writing as spurious, or 

1 JJeher das Alter, den Verfasser, die ursprungliche Form und den wahren 
Sinn des Friedenspruches, 1850. 

" Karl Bertheau, in Herzog, Beal Encyklopddie, 1881, IX., s. 531. 

3 Briggs, "Origin of the Phrase '■ in necessariis unitas,'' etc.," Presbyterian 
Beview, 1887, pp. 496 seq. ; also "Rupertus Meldenius and his Word of Peace," 
Presbyterian Beview, 1887, pp. 743 seq. 



102 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

when they attribute it to some other author ; or from their silence 
when they do not speak of it, though they have occasion to men- 
tion it : This argument, which is commonly called a negative one, 
is oftentimes of very great weight. When, for example, we find, 
that several entire books which are attributed to one of the 
ancients, are unknown to all antiquity: When all those persons 
that have spoken of the works of an author, and besides, have 
made catalogues of them, never mention such a particular dis- 
course: When a book that would have been serviceable to the 
Catholics has never been cited by them, who both might and 
ought to have cited it, as having a fair occasion to do it, 'tis ex- 
treamly probable that it is supposititious. It is very certain that 
this is enough to make any book doubtful, if it was never cited 
by any of the ancients; and in that case it must have very authen- 
tik characters of antiquity, before it ought to be received without 
contradiction. And on the other hand, if there should be never 
so few conjectures of its not being genuine, yet these, together 
with the silence of the ancients, will be sufficient to oblige us to 
believe it to be a forgery." ^ 

The argument from silence lias risen to so much greater 
importance since the s^eventeenth century that we shall venture 
to define it more narrowly. ^ 

(a) Silence is a lack of evidence ivhen it is clear that the matter 
in question did not come within the scope of the autho7'''s plans and 
purposes. 

In the book of Esther, there is no mention of the Divine Name, 
and no conception of Divine Providence. This seems, at the first 
glance, very strange. The history of Esther would be as fitting to 
illustrate Divine Providence as the story of Joseph. We should 
expect that the Divine Kame would have been frequently in the 
mouths of the heroes of the story. And yet, on closer examina- 
tion, it appears that the book of Esther was written with a very 
different purpose from the story of Joseph. It was the work of 
a patriotic Jew who wished to enforce fidelity to Jewish national- 
ity. The author's scope was patriotic and ethical, rather than reli- 
gious or doctrinal. Hence, while the name of the Persian monarch 
appears 187 times, the name of God does not occur. Persian 
decrees, and the fidelity of Esther to her nation, and skill in over- 

1 In I.e., p. viii. 

2 For an elaboration and explanation of these principles we must refer to the 
author's paper on the argument e silentio., read before the Society of Biblical 
Literature and Exegesis in June, 1883, and published in their Journal for 1883. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 103 

coming the intrigues of its enemies, take the place of the Divine 
Providence. The same is true in the Song of Songs. Its scope 
is essentially ethical, to show the victory of marital love over all 
the seductions that may be employed to constrain it toward others 
than the rightful object of it. The author had no occasion to use 
the Divine Name or to speak of religious themes. 

(b) Silence is an evidence that the matter in question had cer- 
tain characteristics which excluded it from the author^ s argument. 
This argument is on the well-known popular principle that 
silence gives consent. If there were evidence to the contrary, 
it would certainly have been produced. 

A fine example of this argument is given by Bishop Lightfoot 
in his review of the author of " Supernatural Eeligion " ^ in treat- 
ing of the silence of Eusebius. He quotes from Eusebius, H. E., 
III. 3, to the effect that the design of Eusebius was to give (1) the 
references or testimonies in case of disputed writings of the 
Canon only; (2) the records of anecdotes in case of the acknow- 
ledged and disputed writings alike. If the Gospel of John had 
been a disputed writing, Eusebius would have given references 
and testimonies according to his first principle. He does not do 
this, therefore " the silence of Eusebius respecting early witnesses 
to the Fourth Gospel is an evidence in its favour. Its apostolic 
authorship had never been questioned by any church writer from 
the beginning so far as Eusebius was aware, and therefore it was 
superfluous to call witnesses." 

(c) The matter in question lies fairly/ within the author's scope^ 
and it was omitted for good and sufficient reasons luhich may he 
ascertained. 

This phase of the argument from silence was used in the re- 
nowned argument of Warburton.- He argues : If religion be neces- 
sary to civil government, and if religion cannot subsist under the 
common dispensation of Providence without a future state of re- 
wards and punishments, so consummate a lawgiver [Moses] would 
never have neglected to inculcate the belief of such a state, had 
he not been well assured that an extraordinary Providence was 
indeed to be administered over his people. This argument has 
been often disputed. Both premises have been called in question. 
There can be no doubt that the idea that " religion cannot subsist 
under the common dispensation of Providence, without a future 

1 Contemporary Eevieic^ XXV., pp. 183 seq. 

2 Divine Legation of Moses Vindicated^ London, 1837, Vol. II. pp. 531 seq. 



104 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

state of rewards and punislinieiits," rests on too narrow an induc- 
tion of the religions of the world. There can be no doubt that 
, Warburton is disposed to minimize the Old Testament statements 
as to the future life ; and yet it seems that he is certainly correct 
in his statement that the Pentateuchal codes are silent as to a 
future state of rewards and punishments, and that this silence 
was designed. Warburton calls attention justly to Moses' famil- 
iarity with the Egyptian religion and its highly developed es- 
chatology. We have now abundant evidence to show that the 
Babylonian and other Shemitic religions, with which the patri- 
archal ancestors were first brought in contact, were full and 
elaborate on this subject. The Hebrews throughout their history 
were in communication with nations which had the most elabo- 
rate eschatologies. The silence of these codes was designed. We 
are not convinced that this silence is to be explained altogether 
on the principle that the Hebrew government was a theocracy of 
extraordinary Providence; yet we are sure that it was the design 
of the codes to emphasize the duties and the life in the Holy Land 
under the divine instruction, and of the blessings in store for 
such a life, and to ignore the future state of rewards and punish- 
ments on that account. The essential thing was the divine bless- 
ing in life, and the most dreaded thing was the divine curse in 
life. This was a healthy ethical position. Only an unhealthy 
religion will depreciate the moral character of life in this world, 
in the interest of the future life. 

(d) The silence of the author as to that which was within the 
scope of his argument tvas unconscious and therefore ignorance is 
implied. 

Where there is silence in authors, we may assume ignorance 
as to the matter in question, and even find positive disproof of 
the story. An event or an opinion might not be known to a 
particular person, or might be known to but a few, and these 
might perish. But it is to be presumed that those to whom 
the event or knowledge was known, would make it known if 
it were within the scope of their argument. We prove the 
growth of knowledge from the silence of early writers and the 
statements of later writers. The statement of opinions gives 
us the basis for the history of opinions. Silence is an evidence 
of ignorance as to them. 

A tradition handed down from Fox, and apparently supported 
by the Colophon of Tyndale's first edition of his translation of 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 105 

Genesis. " emprinted at Marlborow in tlie land of Hesse, by me 
Hans Luft, &c./' pretends that Tyndale was a student at Marburg, 
and that he went from thence to Hamburg by way of Antwerp, 
to meet Coverdale in 1529 ; Mombert ^ disproves this tradition by 
showing that (1) there is no record at Marburg of Hans Luft ever 
having set up a printing press there, and (2) that the Album of 
the University does not contain Tyndale's name among the matric- 
ulates, as it would have done if he had matriculated, inasmuch 
as it gives Patrick Hamilton and others : and (3) there is an 
absence of historic evidence as to Coverdale's going to Hamburg. 

(e) When the silence extends over a variety of writings of 
different authors^ of different classes of icritings and different 
periods of composition^ it implies either some strong and over- 
poiuering external restraint such as divine interposition^ or eccle- 
siastical or civil power ; or it implies a general and wide-spread 
public ignorance which presents a strong presumptive evidence 
regarding the reality and truthfulness of the matter in question. 

Many examples of this line of argument might be adduced. 
Archbishop Whately proves from the silence of Scripture as to 
Confessions of Faith, Liturgies, Rubrics, and the like, that the 
authors were supernaturally withheld from giving them in 
order to give liberty to the Church. ^ This is the phase of the 
argument from silence which is used with so much effect to 
prove that the Deuteronomic code originated in the time of 
Josiah and the priest-code in the exile. The history previous 
to these times presents an ignorance of these codes and unre- 
buked violation of them. The literature previous to these 
times is unconscious of their existence.^ 

The argument from silence is therefore an argument of great 
importance, all the more convincing from its delicacy and the 
indirect and roundabout paths by which it reaches its end. 
Sometimes it shoots like a comet to a surprising result, but 
usually it traces its way in every variety of beautiful curves. 

The Higher Criticism of Holy Scripture is a study, which 
has its well-defined principles, its accurate methods, its clearly 
expressed questions ; and its results are as sure as those of any 
other science. 

1 Handbook of the English Versions of the Bible, New York, 1883, pp. 107 seq. 

2 Essays, Kingdom of God. ^ See pp. 307, 323. 



106 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The internal evidence must be used with great caution and 
sound judgment, for an able and learned forger might imitate 
so as to deceive the most expert, and the author of a pseud- 
epigraph might intentionally place his writing in an earlier age 
of the world and in circumstances best suited to carry out his 
idea. But sooner or later a faithful and persistent application 
of the critical tests will determine the forgeries and the pseud- 
epigraphs and assign them their real literary position. As to 
the relative value of the internal and external evidence we 
cannot do better than use the judicious words of Sir William 
Hamilton ; " But if our criticism from the internal grounds 
alone be, on the one hand, impotent to establish, it is, on the 
other hand, omnipotent to disprove."^ 

The importance of this higher criticism is well stated by 
Du Pin : 

" Criticism is a kind of torch, that lights and conducts us in the 
obscure tracts of antiquity, by making us to distinguish truth from 
falsehood, history from fable, and antiquity from novelty. 'Tis 
by this means, that in our times we have disengaged ourselves 
from an infinite number of very common errors, into which our 
fathers fell for want of examining things by the rules of true 
criticism. For 'tis a surprising thing to consider how many 
spurious books we find in antiquity; nay, even in the first ages 
of the Church." ^ 

In order to illustrate these principles of the Higher Criticism 
we shall present a few additional specimens of their applica- 
tion from eminent divines. 

The first illustration that we shall give is with reference to 
the question of integrity. The so-called Apostles' Creed is the 
most sacred writing exterior to the canon of Scripture. 

Till the middle of the seventeenth century it was the current 
belief of Koman Catholic and Protestant Christendom that the 
Apostles' Creed was ^^memhratum articulatumque," composed by 
the apostles in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, or before their 
separation, to secure unity of teaching, each contributing an arti- 
cle (hence the somewhat arbitrary division into twelve articles). 

The arguments adduced, by Dr. Schaff to prove that this 
tradition is false, are : (1) The intrinsic improbability of such 
1 Logic, p. 471. 2 i^,^ p. vii. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 107 

a mechaiiical composition. (2) The silence of Scripture. 
(3) The .silence of the apostolic fathers and of all the Ante- 
Nicene and Nicene fathers and synods, (-i) The variety in 
form of the creed down to the eighth century. (5) The 
fact that the Apostles' Creed never had any currency in the 
East, where the Nicene Creed occupies its place. ^ 

Many scholars have studied the structure of the Creed more 
fully, and have shown the process of its formation and all the 
changes through which it passed, until it gradually, in 750 A.D., 
assumed its present stereotyped form.^ 

One of the best illustrations of the effective work of the Higher 
Criticism with reference to the question of authenticity, is afforded 
by Bentley in his celebrated work on the epistles of Phalaris.^ 
Bentley proves these epistles to be forgeries of a sophist : I. By 
internal evidence. (1) They do not accord with their presumed 
age, but with other ages. They mention (a) Aloesa, a city which 
was not built till 140 years after the latest year of Phalaris ; 
(5) Theridean cups, which were not known until 120 years after the 
death of Phalaris ; (c) Messana, as a different city from Zaude, 
whereas it was a later name for the same city, which was not 
changed till 60 years after the death of Phalaris; (d) Tauro- 
minium, 140 years before it was ever thought of. 

(2) Differences of style : (a) the use of the Attic dialect instead 
of the Doric, the speech of Phalaris, and indeed not of the old 
Attic, but the new Attic that was not used till centuries after 
Phalaris' time. 

(3) Differences of thought : (a) reference to tragedy before 
tragedy came into existence; (6) use of Attic and not Sicilian 
talents in speaking of money; (c) use of the word irpovoia for 
Divine Providence, which was not used before Plato, and of Koa/xos 
for the universe, which was not so used before Pythagoras; 
(d) inconsistencies between the ideas and matter of the epistle, 
which are those of a sophist, and the historical character of Phala- 
ris as a politician and tyrant. 

(4) Relation to other ivriters. He uses Herodotus, Demosthenes, 
Euripides. 

II. The external evidences are : (5) testimony. Atossa is said 

1 Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, New York, 1877, I. p. 19. 

2 Lumby, History of the Creeds, Cambridge, 1873, pp. 169 seq. See more 
fully Kattenbusb, Das apostolische Symbol, Leipzig, 1894. 

3 A Dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris, London, 1699, a new edition 
edited by Wilhelm Wagner, London, 1883. 



108 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

to have been tlie first inventor of epistles. Hence those that carry 
the name of Phalaris two generations earlier must be impostures. 
(6) Silence. There is a thousand years of silence as to these 
epistles. "For had our letter been used or transcribed during 
that thousand years, somebody would have spoken of it, especially 
since so many of the ancients had occasion to do so ; so that their 
silence is a direct argument that they never had heard of them." ^ 

We have dwelt at some length upon the principles and 
methods of the Higher Criticism, because of their great impor- 
tance in our day with reference to the Sacred Scriptures and 
the lack of information concerning them that still prevails to 
an astonishing degree among men who make some pretensions 
to scholarship. 

The Higher Criticism has vindicated its rights in the field 
of biblical study as well as in all other kinds of literature. It 
matters little who may oppose its course, what combinations may 
be made against it, it will advance steadily and irresistibly to its 
results ; it will flow on over every obstacle like a mighty river 
and bury every obstruction beneath its waves. In time it will 
give a final decision to all the literary problems of Holy Script- 
ure. No other voice can decide them. Men may for a time 
refuse to listen to its voice, they may try to deaden it by a chorus 
of outcries and shoutings of opposition. But Higher Criticism 
is in no haste, she can wait. She does not seek the favour of 
ecclesiastics, or the applause of the populace. She seeks the 
truth, and having won the truth she is sure of the everlasting 
future. 

It is true that critics have made serious mistakes in the past. 
And it is quite probable that they are making mistakes at the 
present time. But what department of scholarly investigation 
is free from mistakes ? Holy Scripture is in the hands of every 
one, and almost every one thinks he is a competent critic, and 
therefore it is more exposed to blunders than any other litera- 
ture. It is quite true that some able and honest men are 
opposed to the principles and methods of the Higher Criticism. 
But every one of these is opposed to criticism on dogmatic 
grounds, because it imperils the dogmas of his school and party. 

1 New edition, 1883, p. 481. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 109 

The same set of men have opposed every advance of modern 
science and modern philosophy. Such men are not true bibli- 
cal scholars. What kind of a detective would he make, who 
should maintain that there Avas no sure way of detecting crimi- 
nals ? What sort of a chemist would he make, who spent his 
strength in opposing and ridiculing the principles and results 
of chemistry ? One sees what sort of scholars those are, who 
exhaust their energies in discrediting the principles of the 
Higher Criticism and in battling against its sure results. The 
Higher Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures has an array of 
able scholars who would adorn any profession and grace any 
science, and they are in as close agreement in their results as 
any other body of scholars in any other science, or in any other 
profession. 

III. The Criticism of Holy Scripture 

Thus far Biblical Criticism has derived from other branches 
of criticism the principles and methods of its work. Has it 
not, however, some peculiar features of its own, as it has to do 
with the sacred canon of the Christian Church? Does the 
fact that the canon of Sacred Scripture is holy, inspired, and 
of divine authority, lift it above criticism, or does it give 
additional features of criticism that enable us to test the genu- 
ineness of these claims respecting it ? The latter is the true 
and only safe position, and it is evident that our effort should 
be to determine these principles and methods. We reserve 
this question for our following chapter. 

In the meanwhile we have to meet on the threshold of our 
work a 'priori objections that would obstruct our progress in 
the application of the principles and methods of criticism to 
the Bible. 

Biblical Criticism is confronted by traditional views of the 
Bible that do not wish to be disturbed, and by dogmatic state- 
ments respecting the Bible which decline reinvestigation and 
revision. The claim is put forth that these traditional views 
and dogmatic statements are in accordance with the Scriptures 
and the symbols of the Church, and that the orthodox faith is 
put in peril by criticism. 



110 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Such claims as these can only influence the adherents of the 
Church, and, at the utmost, debar them from the exercise of 
criticism. They cannot be more than amusing to the unbe- 
lieving and the sceptical, who care but little for the Church 
and still less for theologians and their orthodoxy. They will 
use the tests of criticism without restraint. We cannot pre- 
vent them. The question is whether Christian scholars also 
shall be entitled to use them in the study of the Scriptures, or 
whether Holy Scripture is to be intrusted solely to the hands 
of dogmatic theologians and scholastics who usually have little 
if any technical knowledge of Holy Scripture itself. And we 
are entitled to ask: Why should the Scriptures fear the most 
searching investigation ? If they are truly the Word of God 
they will maintain themselves and vindicate themselves in the 
battle of criticism. If we are sure of this, let us rejoice in the 
conflict that will lead to victory; if we are in doubt of it, it is 
best that our doubts should be removed as soon as possible. 
Then let the tests be applied, and let us know in whom we 
trust and what we believe. ^ 

It is pretended that the Church doctrine of inspiration is in 
peril, and that the authority of the Scriptures is thereby under- 
mined. If there were one clearly defined orthodox doctrine of 
inspiration to which all Christians agreed, as supported by 
Holy Scripture and the creeds of the Church, our task would 
be easier. But, in fact, there are many various theories of in- 
spiration, and several ways of stating the doctrine of inspira- 
tion that are without support in Scripture or symbol. It is 
necessary, therefore, to discriminate, in order to determine ex- 
actly what is in peril, whether inspiration itself and the author- 
ity of the Sacred Scriptures^ or some particular and false theory 
of inspiration and the authority of some theologian or school 
of theology. 

The doctrine of inspiration may be constructed (1) by a 
careful, painstaking study of the Sacred Scriptures themselves, 
gathering together their testimony as to their own origin, 
character, design, value, and authority. This gives us the 
biblical doctrine of the Scriptures and the doctrine of inspira- 
1 Robert Rainy, Bible and Criticism, London, 1878, p. 33. 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 111 

tion as a part of Biblical Theology. Any one who has at- 
tempted this task will admit that Holy Scripture is extremely 
modest in its claims and that the biblical doctrine of inspira- 
tion and scriptural authority is much more simple and much 
less definite and exacting than any of the theories of the theo- 
logians. (2) The doctrine of inspiration may be constructed 
from a study of the sj^mbolical books of the Church, which 
express the faith of the Church as attained in the great crises 
of its history, in the study of the Scriptures, in the experiences 
and life of men. This gives us the symbolical, or orthodox, or 
Church doctrine of inspiration. The Church doctrine does not, 
in fact, obstruct the pathway of criticism. (3) The doctrine 
of inspiration may be constructed by a study of Scripture and 
symbol, and the logical unfolding of the results of a more 
extended study of the whole subject in accordance with the 
dominant philosophical and theological principles of the times. 
This gives us the dogmatic, or school, or traditional doctrine of 
inspiration as it has been established in particular schools of 
theology, and has become traditional in the teaching of certain 
chairs and pulpits, in the various particular theories of inspira- 
tion that have been formulated. It is with these theories and 
with these alone that Biblical Criticism has to battle. 

As we rise in the doctrinal process from the simple biblical 
statements, unformulated as they lie in the sacred writings or 
formulated in Biblical Theology, to the more complex and 
abstract statements of the symbols expressing the formulated 
consensus of the leaders of the Church in the formative 
periods of history, and then to the more theoretical and scho- 
lastic statements of the doctrinal treatises of the theologians ; 
while the doctrine becomes more and more complex, massive, 
consistent, and imposing, and seems, therefore, to become more 
authoritative and binding ; in reality the authority diminishes 
in this relative advance in systematization, so that what is 
gained in extension is lost in intension : for the construction 
is a construction of sacred materials by human and fallible 
minds, with defective logic, failing sometimes to justify prem- 
ises, and leaping to conclusions that cannot always be defended, 
and in a line and direction determined by the temporary and 



112 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

provisional conditions and necessities of the times, neglecting 
modifying circumstances and conditions. The concrete that 
the Bible gives us is for all time, as it is the living and eternal 
substance ; though changeable, it reproduces and so perpetu- 
ates itself in a wonderful variety of forms of beauty, yet all 
blending and harmonizing as the colours of the clouds and skies 
under the painting of the sunbeams ; but the abstract is the 
formal and the perishable, as it is broken through and shat- 
tered by the pulsations and struggles of the living and devel- 
oping truth of God, ever striving for expression and adaptation 
to every different condition of mankind, in the different epochs 
and among the various races of the world. 

The course of religious history has clearly established the 
principle that there is a constant tendency in all religions, and 
especially in the Christian religion, in the systematic or dog- 
matic statement to constrain the symbol as well as the Script- 
ures into the requirements of the particular formative principle 
and the needs of the particular epoch. The dogmatic scheme is 
too often the mould into which the gold of the Scriptures and 
the silver of the creed are poured to coin a series of definitions, 
and fashion a system of theology which not only breaks up the 
concrete and harmonious whole of the Scriptures into frag- 
ments, stamping them with the imprint of the particular con- 
ception of the theologian in order to their reconstruction; but 
not infrequently the constructed system becomes an idol of 
the theologian and his pupils, as if it were the orthodox, the 
divine truth, while a mass of valuable scriptural and symbolical 
material is cast aside in the process, and lies neglected in the 
workshop. In course of time the symbols as well as the Script- 
ures are overlaid with glosses and perplexing explanations, so 
that they become either dark, obscure, and uncertain to the 
ordinary reader, or else have their meanings deflected and per- 
verted, until they are once more grasped by a living, energet- 
ical faith in a revived state of the Church, and burst forth 
from their scholastic fetters, that Holy Scripture, the Church's 
creed, and Christian life may once more correspond. While 
traditionalism and scholasticism have not prevailed in the 
Protestant churches to the same extent as in the Greek and 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 113 

Roman churches ; for the right of private judgment and the 
universal priesthood of believers have maintained their ground 
with increasing vigour in Western Europe and America since 
the Reformation ; yet it is no less true that the principle of 
traditionalism is ever at work in the chairs of theology and in 
the pulpits of the Church : so that in seeking for truth and in 
estimating what is binding on faith and conscience, even Prot- 
estants must distinctly separate the three things : Bible, sym- 
bol, and tradition ; the Bible, the sole infallible norm ; the 
symbol, binding those who hold to the body of which it is the 
banner ; the tradition of any sect or school which demands at 
the most the respect, reverence, careful consideration, and the 
presumption in its favour on the part of the adherents of that 
sect or school. It is assumption for it to claim the same 
authority as Bible, Church, or Catholic tradition. It will be 
tested and tried, if worthy of consideration, and it must take 
its chances in the crucible. 

It is of vast importance that we should make these dis- 
tinctions on the threshold of the study of the critical theories ; 
for there is no field in which modern, local, and provincial 
tradition has been more hasty in its conclusions, more busy in 
their formation, more dogmatic and sensitive to criticism, more 
reluctant and stubborn to give way to the truth, than in 
the sacred fields of the Divine Word. Thus criticism is con- 
fronted at the outset now as ever with two a priori objections. 

1st. There are those who maintain that their traditional 
views of the Sacred Scriptures are inseparably bound up with 
their doctrine of inspiration ; so that even if they should be in 
some respects doubtful or erroneous, they must be left alone 
for fear of the destruction of the doctrine of inspiration itself. 
This is true of those traditional theories of inspiration which 
in some quarters have expanded so as to cover a large part of 
the ground, and commit themselves to theories of text, and 
author, date, style, and integrity of writings, in accordance 
with a common, but, in our judgment, an injudicious method 
of discussing the whole Bible under the head of Bibliology in 
the prolegomena of the dogmatic system ; but this is not true 
of the symbolical doctrine of inspiration, still less of the script- 



114 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

ural doctrine. The most that this objection can require of the 
critics is, that they should be careful and cautious of giving 
offence, or of needlessly shocking prejudice ; that they should 
be respectful and reverent of the faith of the people and of 
revered theologians ; but it is not to be supposed that it 
will make them recreant to their trust of seeking earnestly, 
patiently, persistently, and prayerfully for the truth of God. 
In fact, these school doctrines of inspiration have obtruded 
themselves in place of the symbolical and scriptural doctrine, 
and it is necessary to destroy these school doctrines in order to 
the safety of the biblical doctrine and the symbolical doctrine. 
However distressing this may be to certain dogmatic divines 
and their adherents, it affords gratification to all sincere lovers 
of the truth of God. 

2d. There are those who claim that their traditional theory 
is the logical unfolding of the doctrine of the Symbols and the 
Scriptures. But this is begging the very question at issue, 
which will not be yielded. Why should dogmatic theologians 
claim exemption from criticism and the testing of the grounds 
of their systems ? Such an arbitrary claim for deductions and 
consequences is one that no true critic or historian ought to 
concede : for, by so doing, he abandons at once the right and 
ground of criticism, and the inductive methods of historical 
and scientific investigation ; and sacrifices his material to the 
dogmatist and scholastic, surrendering the concrete for the 
abstract. The very sensitiveness to criticism displayed in 
some quarters justifies suspicion that the theories are weak 
and will not sustain investigation. 

Traditional theories cannot overcome critical theories with 
either of these a priori objections of apprehended peril to faith 
or pretended logical inconsistencies with dogma, but must sub- 
mit to the test of criticism. One of the most characteristic prin- 
ciples of Puritanism is that : 

" God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from 
the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in anything 
contrary to His Word or beside it in matters of faith and worship ; 
so that, to believe such doctrine, or to obey such commandments 
out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience ; and the 



HOLY SCRIPTURE AND CRITICISM 115 

requiring an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is 
to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also." ^ 

Biblical Criticism bases its historic right on the principles of 
the Reformation and of Puritanism, and it finds no hindrance in 
the Catholic principle of the supremacy of Church tradition, for 
thus far these present no obstacles to criticism. It is the un- 
churchly, undefined, and unlearned tradition which presumes to 
obstruct the work of Biblical Criticism. 

Recent critical theories arise and work as did their prede- 
cessors, in the various departments of the study of Holy 
Scripture. Here is their strength, that they antagonize modern 
traditional dogma with the Bible itself, and appeal from pro- 
vincial school theology to Catholic credal theology. Unless 
traditional theories of inspiration can vindicate themselves on 
biblical grounds, meet the critics, and overcome them in fair 
conflict, in the sacred fields of the Divine Word, sooner or 
later traditional theories will be driven from the field. It will 
not do to antagonize critical theories of the Bible with tra- 
ditional theories of the Bible ; for the critic appeals to history 
against tradition, to an array of facts against so-called infer- 
ences, to the laws of probation against dogmatic assertion, to 
the Divine Spirit speaking in the Scriptures against external 
authority. History, facts, truth, the laws of thought, are all 
divine products, and most consistent Avith the Divine Word, 
and they will surely prevail. 

The great majority of professional biblical scholars in the 
various universities and theological halls of the world, embra- 
cing those of the greatest learning, industry, and piety, demand 
a revision of traditional theories of the Bible, on account of 
a large induction of new facts from the Bible and history. 
These critics must be met with argument and candid reasoning 
as to these facts and their interpretation, and cannot be over- 
come by mere cries of alarm for the Church and the Bible, 
which, in their last analysis, usually amount to nothing more 
than peril to certain favourite views. What peril can come 
to the Holy Scriptures from a more profound critical study 

1 Westminster Conf. of Faith, XX. 2 ; see also A. T. Mitchell, The West- 
minster Assembly : its History and Standards, London, 1883, pp. 8 seq., 465. 



116 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of them ? The sword of the Spirit alone will conquer in this 
warfare. Are Christian men afraid to put it to the test ? For 
this is a conflict after all between true criticism and false criti- 
cism ; between the criticism which is the product of the evan- 
gelical spirit of the Reformation, and critical principles that 
are the product of deism and rationalism. Biblical criticism 
has been marching from conquest to conquest, though far too 
often at a sad disadvantage, like a storming party who have 
sallied forth from their breastworks to attack the trenches of 
the enemies of the Bible, finding in the hot encounter that the 
severest fire and gravest peril are from the misdirected bat- 
teries of their own line. We do not deny the right of dog- 
matism and the a priori method, within their proper spheres ; 
but we maintain the greater right of criticism and the induc- 
tive method in the field of the study of Holy Scripture and 
their far greater importance in the acquisition of true and 
reliable knowledge of Holy Scripture, If criticism and dog- 
matism are harnessed together, a span of twin steeds, they will 
draw the car of theology rapidly towards its highest ideal; 
but pulling in opposite directions they tear it to pieces. 



CHAPTER V 

HISTORY OF THE CANOiT OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The first work of Biblical Criticism is to investigate the 
Canon of the Bible and to determine, so far as possible, the 
entire extent and the exact limits of Holy Scripture. This 
investigation is first of all an historical study. It is first neces- 
sary for us to know what writings have in fact been officially 
recognized as canonical in the different epochs in the history 
of Israel and the Christian Church. When we have all the 
historical facts before us, then we may by induction establish 
principles and rules for the critical investigation of the Canon 
and apply those rules for its final testing and verification. 
The term Canon was first applied to Holy Scripture by the 
Greek Fathers of the fourth Christian century. ^ But the 
underlying conception of a sacred collection of literature, or 
books of divine authority, as the norm of religion, faith, and 
morals, is much more ancient. This conception is in some 
respects more fully expressed in the terms, " the Holy Script- 
ures,^^ 2 and " the Scriptures,''' ^ which, though most ancient, 
have continued to the present day as the most common and 
appropriate titles of the Bible. Still more ancient are the 
terms the Book or Books of the Laiv, the Law of Yahweh, the 
Laiv of God, the Law ; * and the Book of the Covenant, the Cove- 

1 Buhl, Kanon und Text des Alt. Test., Leipzig, 1891, s. 1; Holtzmann, 
Einleitung in d. Neue Test., 2te Aufl., 1886, s. 162 seq. 

2 ypacpal ayiai, Rom. 1^ ; (ra) lepa ypajxixara, 2 Tim. S^^ ; JosephuS, Antiq. Jud., 

Prooem 3 ; Philo, Legat. ad Caium, § 29, II. 574 ; al UpaX Hi^xoi, Josephus, Antiq. 
Jud., Prooem 4 ; 2i6, 20261, etc. ; Philo, De Vita Mos., lib. 3, t. 2, p. 163 ; ret ^Ll3\ia 

TO, ayia, 1 MaCC, 129. 

3 al ypa<pai, Mt. 2229 ; John 539 . Acts 172- " ; SnSDH, Dan. 92. 

* T^ Bi&\ia rod v6/xov, 1 Macc. 1^6 ; the Book of the Law, Neh. S^ ; 2 Chr. 3415 . 
the Law of Yahweh, Ezr. 710 ; 1 Chr. 16*^ ; 2 Chr. 3525 ; the Law of God, Neh. 
1029. 30 . s v6ixos, John 1034 . 1 Cor. 1421 ; rrmn.l, Neh. lO^s- 37 ^ cf . my article on 
n^in in Robinson's Gesenius Hebr. Lexicon, new edition, B.D.B. 

117 



118 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

nant^ that is, the covenant between God and His people. The 
two ancient divisions of the Bible persist to the present time 
as the Old Covenant or Testament, and the New Covenant 
or Testament. 



I. The Formation of the Old Testament Canon 

It is necessary to go much further back in the history of 
the formation of the Canon than biblical scholars usually do. 
It is the common opinion that the formation of the Canon 
began with Ezra.^ Others think that it began with the official 
adoption of the Deuteronomic code.^ But if we are to go back 
to the adoption of the code of the Law by Ezra, or further 
back to the code of Deuteronomy, why should we not go still 
further back to the code of the Covenant and to the primary 
code of the Ten Words ? These earlier codes were something 
more than " preparations for a Canon " ; they were recognized 
as of divine authority, no less truly by the earlier generations, 
than were the Deuteronomic code in the reign of Josiah and 
the Priest code in the time of Ezra. 

1. Accordingly the formation of the Canon began with the 
promulgation of the Ten Words as the fundamental divine Law 
to Israel. These Ten Words were given in their original form 
as brief, terse words or sentences. The specifications and 
reasons were added in the several different documents of the 
Hexateuch, and these were eventually compacted together in 
the two versions, Ex. 20 and Deut. 5.* These Ten Words were 
given by the theophanic voice of God to Israel on Mount 
Horeb. They were taken up into all the original documents 
of the Hexateuch. They lie at the basis of the entire legisla- 
tion. They have the authority of God, and public recognition 
and adoption. They were kept, on the two tables of stone, in 

1 j8t)8Aos 5iae-f}K-ns, Eccl. 2i'^^ ; 0i$\lov 5ia9r}Kr]s, 1 Macc. 1^'^ ; cf. iwl ri} ava- 
yvuaei rrjs iraAaias dia6i]Kris, 2 Cor. 3-^*. 

2 Buhl, Kanon und Text des Alt. Test., s. 8. 

8 Ryle, The Canon of the Old Testament, London, 1892, pp. 47 seq. See also 
Corniil, Einleitung, 1891, s. 277. 

* See " Genesis of the Ten Words," in my Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, 
new edition, New York, 1897, pp. 181 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 119 

the holy ark in the most Holy Place of the tabernacle and the 
temple. If any document fulfils all the tests of canonicity the 
Tables of the Law certainly do. 

The promulgation of the Ten Words was soon followed by 
the giving of the Book of the Covenant. On the basis of this 
Book of the Covenant, the covenant of Horeb was established by 
a covenant sacrifice in which the people solemnly pledged them- 
selves to obedience, and the}^ were sprinkled with the blood of 
the covenant in order to consecrate them in this covenant rela- 
tion. Their representatives then partook of the sacrificial feast 
of the covenant in the presence of the Theophany.^ 

This covenant is the one upon which the entire subsequent 
religion of Israel depends. It is the old covenant to which 
the new covenant established by Jesus, in connection with the 
institution of the sacramental feast of the Lord's Supper, is the 
antithesis. No book that ever was written fulfils so entirely 
the tests of canonicity as this fundamental Book of the Cove- 
nant upon which all subsequent Hebrew law is built. The 
Book of the Covenant appears in one form in the Judaic narra- 
tive,2 in another in the Ephraimitic narrative,^ and has also 
been taken up into the Deuteronomic code.* There can be 
little doubt that the original Book of the Covenant contained 
only the brief terse Words ; and that the other t}^es of Hebrew 
law, such as statutes, judgments, and commands, contained in 
the Greater Book of the Covenant and in the Deuteronomic 
code, are later additions from varied sources, in the development 
of Hebrew Law in the northern and southern kingdoms. 

2. There is no evidence of any canonical advance until the 
reign of Josiah, when the Deuteronomic code was brought to 
light and received canonical recognition.^ 

1 Ex. 241-11. gee Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, 
1897, pp. 6 seq. 

2 Ex. 34. See " The Decalogue of J and its Parallels in the other Codes," in 
my Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, pp. 189 seq. 

3 Ex. 20"^2_2.3, See "The Greater Book of the Covenant and its Parallels in 
the later Codes," I.e. pp. 211 seq. 

* See I.e., pp. 243 seq. 

^ 2 Kings 22-23 = 2 Chr. 34-35. See Ryle, Ccmon of the Old Testament, for 
an admirable exposition of this event. See also my Higher Criticism of the 
Hexateuch, pp. 15 seq., 81 seq. 



120 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

3. It is agreed among scholars that the first layer of the 
present Hebrew Canon, The Law (embracing the five books, 
Genesis to Deuteronomy), was constituted and officially adopted 
through the influence of Ezra and Nehemiah,^ and the nation 
was solemnly engaged, by covenant and by oath, to obey it. 

4. It has been very commonl}^ held among the Jews and the 
Christians that the entire Canon of the Old Testament was 
fixed in the time of Ezra. 

(a) But there is nothing in the story of Nehemiah to justify 
such an opinion. Nevertheless Nehemiah 8-10 has been inter- 
preted as referring to the entire Canon on the basis of a legend, 
in the Apocalypse of Ezra,^ a pseudepigraphical writing dating 
from the close of the first century of our era. The story is 
that the whole Canon was recalled to the memory of Ezra by 
divine inspiration and recorded by him with the help of five of 
his disciples. . 

(a) On the face of it the story is a legend, but it doubtless 
had an older tradition at its basis. It is probable that the 
whole legend is a gradual evolution of the story given in 
Nehemiah. 

(/3) It is unknown to Josephus and Philo, and there are no 
traces of it in any previous writer, or any contemporary writer. 

(7) It is inconsistent with the fact that the Samaritan Canon 
is confined to the Pentateuch, which could not have been the 
case if the separation of the Samaritans from the Jews had 
taken place subsequent to the establishment of the entire Canon 
of the Old Testament. 

(8) It is also opposed by the fact that a considerable portion 
of the Prophets, and a large part of the other writings, were 
composed subsequent to Ezra. 

(e) Furthermore, the threefold division of the Hebrew 
Canon bears on its face the evidence that the Canon was 
formed in three successive layers.^ 

(6) Another legend is the story that the whole Canon of the 

1 Neh. 8-10. 

2 Chap. 1419 seq. This is 2 Esdras of the Greek Apocrypha and 4 Ezra of the 
English Apocrypha. See Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles^ pp. 11 seq., see p. 257. 

3 See Ryle, Canon of the Old Testament, pp. 239 seq., for a thorough discus- 
sion of this passage of the Apocalypse of Ezra and its historical influence. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 121 

Old Testament was fixed by the men of the Great Synagogue. 
There can be no doubt that modern Protestant opinion as to 
the Great Synagogue is based upon the statements of Elias 
Levita ^ and Buxtorf .^ But these statements are simply the use, 
without critical examination, of Jewish legends which unfolded 
during the centuries of Rabbinical literature from a slender 
support in the Mishnaic tract Pirqe Aboth^ and a Baraitha 
of the Talmud.4 

The Pirqe Aboth states that : " Moses received the Torah from 
Sinai and delivered it to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and 
the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the 
Great Synagogue. They said three things: Be deliberate in 
judgment, and raise up many disciples, and make a fence to the 
Torah. Simon the Just was of the remnants of the Great 
Synagogue." (Chap. I.) 

The Baraitha of the Baba Bathra says : " The men of the Great 
Synagogue wrote Ezekiel and the Twelve, Daniel and the Boll of 
Esther, whose sign is ^l^p.^' 

These passages represent that the men of the Great Syna- 
gogue wrote, that is, collected and edited, Ezekiel, the twelve 
Minor Prophets, Daniel and Esther ; and that they received 
and transmitted the Torah. Nothing is said in either passage 
of their having anything to do with the organization of a Canon 
of Holy Scripture, or of their addition of any writing to the 
Canon. The legend of the establishment of the Canon of the 
Old Testament by the men of the Great Synagogue is thus a 
later evolution of the story of the editing of certain Old Testa- 
ment writings by them, and of their part in the transmission 
of the Torah. But even this primitive story of the Mishna 
and Baraitha is unhistorical, for the simple reason that it makes 
Simon the Just, of the time of Alexander the Great, a member 
of a synagogue which the tradition elsewhere assigns to the 
age of Ezra and Nehemiah. In fact, this legend is more unsub- 
stantial than the other. 

1 Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, edited by Ginsburg, 1867, pp. 112 seq. 

2 Tiberias sive Commentarius Masorethicus, 1620. 

^ Strack, Die Sprilche der Vdter, Karlsruhe, 1882 ; Taylor, Sayings of the 
Jewish Fathers^ Cambridge, 1877. 
* See pp. 252 seq. 



122 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

(a) Back of these Rabbinical sayings of the second and third 
Christian centuries, there is no historical evidence whatever of 
the existence of any such body of men as the Great Synagogue. 
The silence of all writings from the first century backwards is 
absolute. They could not have omitted to mention such a 
body as this if it ever had an existence, because it came within 
their scope to do so if so important a thing as the final deter- 
mination of the Canon of the Old Testament had been under- 
taken by such a body of men. The apocryphal literature in its 
wide and varied extent knows nothing of such a body. The 
numerous pseudepigraphical writings maintain unbroken silence. 
Philo and Josephus are unconscious of anything of the kind. 
The New Testament writers ignore it and write as if it never 
existed. 

(/3) The legend of the determination of the Canon by Ezra 
and his disciples, already considered, is inconsistent with the 
fixing of the Canon by the men of the Great Synagogue, even 
if Ezra were at their head. The legend of Ezra's activity is 
much earlier than that of the activity of the men of the Great 
Synagogue. It is unlikely that it would have originated, if 
there had ever been any such legend of the work of the men 
of the Great Synagogue prior to it. 

(7) It is opposed by the fact that a considerable number of 
the writings of the Old Testament were composed subsequently 
to the supposed times of the Great Synagogue. 

(S) The well-known disputes as to the Canon among the 
Jews in the first Christian century could hardly have taken 
place, if such a venerable body as the men of the Great Syna- 
gogue had determined everything relating to the Canon. 

(e) It is improbable that the Greek version would have 
added anything to the Sacred Writings, if they had been fixed 
so long before by the men of the Great Synagogue. 

This legend must be dismissed as nothing more than a pure 
invention made by the early rabbins to establish an unbroken 
continuity of sacred teachers of the Law, who might transmit 
it as so many links in the chain of authority.^ 

1 See Kuenen, TJeher die Manner der grossen Synagoge^ in Gesammelte Ah- 
handlungen, Freib. 1894, s. 125 seq. ; also Kyle, Canon of the Old Testament^ 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 123 

(c) The Hebrew Scriptures have a second division which 
bears the name Prophets. In the earliest Hebrew list known 
to us, they are arranged as follows : Joshua, Judges, Samuel, 
Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Twelve.^ This repre- 
sents a second layer of canonical formation. It does not 
embrace the book of Daniel, and therefore must have been 
fixed before Daniel gained canonical recognition. It includes 
the prophecy Is. 24-26, which probably belongs to the time of 
Alexander the Great. Therefore this Canon cannot be earlier 
than the Greek period subsequent to Alexander in the third 
century B. c. This is confirmed by the testimony of Jesus ben 
Sirach from the early part of the second century B.C. In 
Ecclesiasticus,^ in the praise of the fathers, he goes over the 
heroes of the books of the Law, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and 
Kings, and the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 
the Twelve, especially mentioning the latter by the technical 
name of the Twelve.^ It is evident that the collection of the 
Twelve had then been closed, and all the Prophets were used 
as sacred books. That seems to carry with it the entire pro- 
phetic collection as we now have it. Furthermore, Daniel cites 
Jeremiah as belonging to the books,^ which implies a collection 
of prophetic books of recognized divine authority. 

In the prologue to Ecclesiasticus, written by the grandson of 
the author in the last half of the second century B.C., it is 
said that : " Many and great things have been delivered unto 
us by the Law and the Prophets, and by others that have fol- 
lowed their steps " ; and the author speaks of his grandfather, 
Jesus ben Sirach, as having " given himself to the reading of 
the Law and the Prophets and other books of our fathers." 
These passages clearly recognize the division of the Prophets 
as next in the Canon to the division of the Law. 

It is also probable that this second formation of the Canon, 
composed of the Law and the Prophets, is reflected in the 
phrase "the Law and the Prophets " of New Testament times. ^ 

Excursus A, pp. 250 seq. Both of these are valuable discussions of the subject. 
They make it perfectly evident that no such body as the Great Synagogue ever 
existed. i See pp. 252 seq. 2 Chapters 44-50. 

3 Eccius. 4910. D^x^sjn "itri; D^3tr Dn. 

4 Dan. 92. 5 Mt. 5^? ; Acts 13i5. 



124 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The second Canon of the Old Testament seems to have been 
established in the high-priesthood of Simon, whose character 
and administration are so highly praised by Ben Sirach.^ 

(5) The third layer of the Hebrew Canon is composed of the 
Writings. These in the oldest lists are, Ruth, Psalms, Job, 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, 
Esther, Ezra, and Chronicles. 

(a) It is still held by some scholars that the testimony of 
the grandson of Ben Sirach in his prologue to Ecclesiasticus is 
in favour of the opinion that the third division of the Canon had 
been fixed before his time. But the terms that are used do not 
make this evident. In the one passage he says : " by the Law 
and the Prophets, and by others that have followed their 
steps." In the other passage he says: "the reading of the 
Law and the Prophets and other books of our fathers." The 
Law and the Prophets are technical terms, but the other 
expressions differ so greatly in the two passages from one 
another, and also from the later technical term, that they evi- 
dently are not technical terms. It is quite true that none of 
the writings contained in the third division of the Hebrew 
Canon were composed subsequently to the second half of the 
second century B.C., but that does not prove that they had 
been collected into a canon in the third century B.C., or 
included by this prologue in its reference to the other writers 
or other books. 

(5) It is improbable that the Greek Septuagint version 
would have added to this third division of the Canon and 
rearranged the books composing it, if it had been fixed before 
the translations were made. 

The Septuagint gives a much larger collection of writings. 
The story prevailed for many centuries in the Eastern and 
Western churches that this translation was made by seventy- 
two accomplished scholars chosen from the twelve tribes of 
Israel, with the cooperation of Ptolemseus Philadelphus, 
king of Egypt, and the Jewish high-priest of Jerusalem, and 
that they were inspired to do their work by the Divine Spirit. 
This story has been traced to its simpler form in Josephus^ 
1 Ecclus. 50. 2 A7itiq. XII. 2. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 125 

and Philo,^ and back of these to the original letter of Aristeas, 
and that has been proved to be a forgery ^ and its statements 
have been shown to be wide of the truth. An internal exami- 
nation of the Septuagint version shows it to have been made 
by different men on different principles and at different times. 

Frankel is followed by a large number of scholars in the 
opinion that the Septuagint was a Greek Targum which grew 
up gradually at first from the needs of the synagogue worship 
in Egypt and then from the desire of the Hellenistic Jews to, 
collect together the religious literature of their nation, just as 
the Palestinian and Babylonian Targums were subsequently 
made for the Jews of Palestine and Syria who spoke Aramaic.^ 

Some of the sacred books, such as Daniel and Esther, have 
additional matter not found in the Hebrew Massoretic text. 
The apocryphal writings are mingled with those of the Hebrew 
Canon without discrimination.* As Deane ^ says : 

"If we judge from the MSS. that have come down to us, it 
would be impossible for any one, looking merely to the Septuagint 
version and its allied works, to distinguish any of the books in the 
collection as of less authority than others. There is nothing what- 
ever to mark off the canonical writings from what have been called 
the deuterocanonical. They are all presented as of equal standing 
and authority, and, if we must make distinctions between them, 
and place some on a higher platform than others, this separation 
must be made on grounds which are not afforded by the arrange- 
ment of the various documents themselves." 

(c) Another evidence for the fixture of the Old Testament 
Canon has been found in a supposed writing of Philo of the first 
Christian century.^ This work speaks of the Law, the Proph- 
ets, hymns, and other writings, making either three or four 
classes, but without specification of particular books. But this 
writing has recently been proved to have been written in the 

1 Vita Mosis, II. §§ 5-7. 

2 The original text of the letter is best given in Merx, Archivfilr Wissen- 
sch a f Cliche Erf orschung des Alten Testaments, I. pp. 242 seq. Halle, 1870. See 
also pp. 188 seq. 

3 Frankel, Vorstudien z. d. Septiiaginta, Leipzig, 1841 ; Scholtz, Alexand. 
Uehersetz. d. Buck lesaias, 1880, pp. 7 seq. 

* See p. 138 for the order of the books in the several codices of the Septuagint. 
5 Book of Wisdom, Oxford, 1881, pp. 37 seq. ^ De Vita Conte^np. S. III. 



126 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

third century A.D., and wrongly attributed to Philo.^ The 
testimony of Philo is therefore reduced to the books that he 
quotes as of divine authority. He uses all of the Rabbinical 
Canon except Ruth, Esther, Ezekiel, Lamentations, Daniel, 
Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs.^ He uses Proverbs and 
Job. This we would expect from Philo's type of thought and 
the subject-matter of his writings. But his omission of Ecclesi- 
astes and the Song of Songs is surprising. These writings be- 
long to the same class of Wisdom Literature as Job and Proverbs. 
They would have given him the very best field for his peculiar 
method of allegory. Ezekiel and Daniel, the symbolical proph- 
ets, we would expect him to make use of. Under these cir- 
cumstances it is not valid to argue against the canonicity of 
the apocryphal books because Philo does not quote them as 
authoritative. The books of the Palestinian Canon which he 
omitted came within his scope more than the apocryphal writ- 
ings. If silence is to be used against the Apocrypha, it is still 
more telling against those writings of the third Canon which he 
omits. 

" It is abundantly clear that to Philo the Pentateuch was a bible 
within a bible, and that he only occasionally referred to other 
books whose sanctity he acknowledged, as opportunity chanced to 
present itself. There are two reasons which, whether considered 
separately or in conjunction, may be said in a measure to account 
for Philo's silence in respect of these four books. (1) In the 1st 
century a.d. some of the books of the Hagiographa were probably 
not yet accepted by all Jews as worthy to be ranked among the 
Holy Scriptures. (2) Some of the books of the Hebrew Script- 
ures were translated into Greek much later than others ; and the 
problems of the Greek text in, e.g. Daniel and Esther, show that 
there was often a considerable difference between the text of rival 
Greek versions, which fact must be considered to be incompatible 
with the early recognition of their sacred authority among the 
Jews of the Dispersion. 

1 Lucius, Die Therapeiiten und ihre Stellung in der Askese, Strassburg, 1880 ; 
Scrack, art. Kanon^ in Herzog, 2te Aufl., vii. p. 425 ; EinleAtung , 5te Aufl., 1898, 
s. 174 ; Massebieau, Le Traite de la Vie Contemplative, Paris, 1888, maintains 
its genuineness ; and Sanday, Inspiration^ 1893, p. 99, says : "the tide of opinion 
seems to have turned in its favour." I cannot agree with him. 

2 Eichhorn, Einleitung, 3te Ausg. 1803, I. p. 98. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 127 

" It must be remembered that the mere citation of a book is not 
the same as the recognition of its Divine Inspiration. In the case 
of the books of Judges and Job, Philo quotes from them, but it is 
not strictly accurate to say that he definitely acknowledges their 
position as inspired Scripture. The evidence does not permit us 
to go so far. At the same time it is practically impossible that a 
book like Judges, included as it was among the "Prophets" of 
the Hebrew Canon of Scripture, should have been rejected by 
Philo ; and exceedingly unlikely that Job, one of the most impor- 
tant of the poetical Hagiographa, should not have ranked in his 
estimation as Scripture. While we may feel convinced that these 
books were in Philo's Scripture, the evidence does not amount 
to actual demonstration. 

"The case is different with Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, 
and Daniel, which have been among the latest books to be received 
into the sacred Canon. It may indeed be said of any one of them, 
as might, perhaps, be said of the book of Ezekiel, that they did 
not furnish Philo with suitable material for quotation, or that 
Philo was, for some reason, not so close a student of these books. 

" But another explanation is possible. In the case of all four of 
these books, there is good ground for supposing that their Canon- 
icity had not been fully recognized in Egypt in the lifetime of 
Philo. And while, in view of other evidence, we may claim that 
the Canonicity of Daniel was probably generally established in 
Palestine in the 1st century b.c, and possibly also that of Eccle- 
siastes, we have not the right to make the same plea for the 
recognition of Esther and the Song of Songs." ^ 

(c?) Josephus ^ mentions 22 books as making up liis Canon 
— five of the Law, thirteen of the Prophets, and four of the 
poems and precepts. He uses all of the Talmudic Canon except 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Job.^ The silence 
of Josephus as to these cannot be pressed, because they did not 
clearly come within his scope. Various efforts have been made 
to determine his books, but without conclusive results. If on 
the one hand the lists of Origen and Jerome favour the Talmudic 
Canon, the list of Junilius Africanus favours the exclusion of 
Chronicles, Ezra, Job, Song of Songs, and Esther.* Graetz^ 
excludes the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes from the list of 

1 Ryle, Philo and HoJy Scripture^ 1895, pp. xxxii, xxxiii. 

2 Contra Apion, I. 8. ^ Eichhorn, in I.e., I. p. 123. 

* See Kihn, Theodore von Mopsuestia und Julius Africanus als Exegeten, 
Freib. 1880, p. 86. ^ Qesch. d. Juden, HI. p. 501, Leipzig, 1863. 



128 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Josephus. He falls, then, by his 22, just these two short of the 
Talmudic list of 24. This neglect of these two writings by 
Josephus would coincide with their neglect by Philo and the 
New Testament, and Avith the strong opposition to them on the 
part of many Palestinian Jews in the first Christian century. 
It seems to me unwarranted to suppose that Josephus attached 
Ruth to Judges and Lamentations to Jeremiah without counting 
them. It is a conjecture without sufficient evidence to sustain 
it. We are left by Josephus in uncertainty as to certain Old 
Testament books. Moreover, the statements of Josephus do 
not carry with them our confidence as to the views of the men 
of his time. Zunz is correct in his statement : " Neither Philo nor 
Josephus impart to us an authentic list of the sacred writings." ^ 

(e) We know that several books were in dispute among 
the Pharisees, such as Ezekiel, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, and 
Esther. They were generally, but not unanimously, acknow- 
ledged. The Sadducees are said by some of the Fathers to have 
agreed with the Samaritans in rejecting all but the Pentateuch. 
This must be a mistake. But we can hardly believe that they 
accepted Ezekiel and Daniel in view of their denial of angels 
and the resurrection. The Essenes and the Zealots agreed in 
extending the Canon to esoteric writings. The Apocalypse of 
Ezra mentions 70 of these as given to Ezra to interpret the 24, 
and so of even greater authority. These parties differ from the 
Pharisees only in that they committed the esoteric wisdom to 
Avriting, whereas the Pharisees handed it down as tradition, 
and prohibited the committing it to writing, until at last it 
foand embodiment in the several layers of the Talmuds. 

There is little doubt that the Canon of the Palestinian Jews 
received its latest addition by common consent not later than 
the time of Judas Maccabeus,^ and no books of later composi- 
tion were added afterward ; yet the schools of the Pharisees 
continued the debate with reference to some of these writings 
until the assembly of rabbins decided it at Jamnia. The Hel- 
lenistic Jews had a wider and freer conception of the Canon. ^ 

1 Gottesdienstlichen Vortrdge der Juden, 1882, p. 18. 

2 Straok, in Herzog, Beal-Encyk. 2te Aufl., vii. p. 426 : Ewald, Lehre d. Bibel 
voH Gott, I. p. 303. 3 Ewald, in I.e., p. 304. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 129 

The order of the formation of the third layer of the Canon 
may be conceived as follows. The first of the Writings to 
gain recognition was the book of Psalms. The earlier minor 
Psalters were collected in the Persian period ; but the composi- 
tion of psalms continued during the Greek period deep into 
the Maccabean age. The Psalter of Solomon, collected in the 
middle of the first century B.c.,^ gives us the limit beyond 
which we cannot go. Its use in the temple worship, and above 
all in the synagogue, and at the great feasts, at festival meals, 
in pilgrimages, and in processions, gave it popular authority as 
Holy Scripture. It is probable that the phrase " the Law of 
Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms "^ represents the syna- 
gogue use of the term and the popular opinion. The earliest 
writing which quotes the Psalter as Scripture is the first book 
of Maccabees at the close of tlie second century.^ The gen- 
eral recognition of the Psalter must have preceded this date, 
and accordingly not be later than the middle of the second 
century B.C. 

The next writings to receive recognition were doubtless Job 
and Proverbs, the chief monuments of the Wisdom Literature. 
This Wisdom Literature exercised a great influence among the 
Jews in the first and second centuries B.C., as we learn from 
the Wisdom of Ben Sirach, which also gained in later times 
canonical recognition by not a few Hebrew rabbins ; and in 
the New Testament times, as we learn from the apocryphal 
Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus of Nazareth as con- 
tained in the Logia of Matthew and cited in our Synoptic 
Gospels,* and in the Pirqe Aboth or Sayings of the Jewish 
Fathers. The books of Ruth and Lamentations received early 
recognition ; but were assigned different places in the Pales- 
tinian and Alexandrinian Canons. The book of Daniel also 
was early recognized as the parent of the later favourite apoca- 
lyptic literature, as represented especially in the Book of Enoch 
and the Apocalypse of Ezra, which also in their turn received 

1 Ryle and James, Psalms of Solomon, 1891 ; Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, 
1894, pp. 31 seq. 

2 Lk. 24*4. 3 1 Mace. 7i". quotes from Ps. 792.3. 

* See my articles on the " Wisdom of Jesus the Messiah," in the Expository 
Times, June, July, August, and November, 1897. 



130 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

canonical recognition by many Jews and Christians. But 
the books of Ecclesiastes, Songs of Songs, Esther, Ezra, and 
Chronicles only gradually won their way, and did not finally 
gain their place in universal recognition until the assembly of 
Jamnia. 

The third layer of the Canon of the Old Testament was not 
definitely limited among the Jews until the close of the first 
Christian century. After the destruction of Jerusalem in 
70 A.D., the Jewish rabbins established themselves at Jamnia. 
Two assemblies seem to have been held there ; one about 90 
A.D., tlie other in 118 a.d. At these assemblies, under the 
presidency of Eleazar ben Azariah, the canonicity of the Song 
of Songs and Ecclesiastes was discussed. They were finally 
decided to be canonical, and so the third Canon of the Old 
Testament w^as closed ^ for the Hebrews. 

"All the Holy Scriptures defile the hands : the Song of Solomon 
and Ecclesiastes defile the hands. R. Judah says, The Song of 
Solomon defiles the liandsj but Ecclesiastes is disputed. R. Jose 
says, Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands, but the Song of Solo- 
mon is disputed. R. Simeon says, Ecclesiastes belongs to the 
light things of the school of Shammai, and the heavy things of 
the school of Hillel. R. Simeon, son of Azai, says, I received it 
from the seventy -two elders on the day when they enthroned R. 
Eleazer, son of Azariah in the council, that the Song of Solomon 
and Ecclesiastes defile the hands. R. Akiba said, God forbid that 
a man of Israel should ever deny that the Song of Solomon defiles 
the hands. For no day in the history of the world is worth the 
day when the Song of Solomon was given to Israel. For all the 
writings are holy, but the Song of Solomon is holy of holies. 
And if there has been any dispute, it referred only to Ecclesiastes, 
R. Johanan, son of Joshua said, the companions of R. Akiba 
according to the son of Azar so they disputed, and so they 
decided.^ 

"In the Talm. Babli. Meg. 7% ^ Rabbi Meir saith: The book 
Koheleth defileth not the hands, and with respect to the Song 
of Songs there is difference of opinion. Rabbi Joshua saith: 

1 Gratz, Gesch. d. Juden, 186.3, III. pp. 496 seq. ; W. Robertson Smith, The 
Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 2d ed., London, 1892, p. 185; Clieyne, 
Job and Solomon, London, 1887, pp. 280 seq. 

2 Mishna, Tract Yadaim, iii. See Robertson Smith in The Old Testament 
in the Jewish Church, p. 186, note. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 131 

The Song of Songs defileth the hands, and with respect to 
Koheleth there is difference of opinion. Rabbi Simeon saith: 
Koheleth belongeth to the things which the school of Shammai 
maketh easy and the school of Hillel maketh difficult ; but Euth, 
the Song of Songs, and Esther defile the hands. Eabbi Simeon 
ben Menasiah saith: Koheleth defileth not the hands, because 
it containeth the Wisdom of Solomon.' " ^ 

II. The Canon of Jesus and His Apostles 

The New Testament does not determine the extent and 
limits of the Canon of the Old Testament. Jesus gives His 
authority to the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms,^ which 
alone were used in the synagogue in His times ; but the Psalms 
only of the Writings are mentioned. There are no sufficient 
reasons for concluding that by the Psalms Jesus meant all the 
other books besides Law and Prophets. If the term " W^rit- 
ings " had become a technical term for the third division of the 
Canon, it is improbable that the Gospel of Luke would sub- 
stitute Psalms for it ; all the less that Psalms has a definite 
historical sense. 

The New Testament uses for the Old Testament the follow- 
ing general terms : (1) the term Scriptures for the whole ; ^ or 
Sacred Writings;^ (2) Law^ referring to the Psalter ; ^ referring 
to several passages of the Prophets ; ^ and to Isaiah ; ^ (3) 
Prophets;^ (4) Law and Prophets;^ Moses and Prophets ;'^^ 
Law of Moses and the Prophets ; ^^ (5) Law of Moses and 
Prophets and Psalms. '^'^ This fluctuation shows, that in the 
minds of the writers of the New Testament there was no 
definite threefold division known as Law, Prophets, and 
Writings. 

Indeed the New Testament carefully abstains from using the 
writings disputed among the Jews. It does not quote at all 
Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah ; and 

1 See Ryle, Canon of the Old Testament, 1892, pp. 198 seq. 

2 Lk. 2444. 8 Lk. 2425 . Acts 13^^. 

3 Acts 172- n ; 1824- 28. 9 Mt. 517 . Acts ISis. 

* 2 Tim. 315. 10 Lk. 1629- 3i j 242? ; Acts 2622. 

6 John 1034 ; 1625. n Acts 2823. 

6 John 1234. la Lk. 2444. 

7 1 Cor. 1421. 



132 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

only incidentally Ezekiel and Clironicles in the same way as 
apocryphal and pseudepigraphical books are used. Was this 
silence discretionary, in order to build only on books recog- 
nized by all, or does it rule from the Canon those books so 
ignored ? ^ 

Thus the book of Jude cites the Apocalypse of Enoch and 
the Assumption of Moses,^ both belonging to the pseudepigra- 
pha, which did not receive recognition in the Hebrew Canon. 
So also the earliest Christian writing outside of the New Testa- 
ment, the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, cites twice from 
the Old Testament ^ and thrice from the Apocrypha.* 

We may not be able to answer this question positively. But 
these things are plain, (a) The New Testament gives its 
authority only to the books of the Old Testament which it 
cites as Scripture. (6) There seems to be no good reason 
why the New Testament writers should not have cited these 
other books, and therefore we cannot certainly say that their 
silence is of no consequence. On the other hand, we cannot 
say that these Old Testament writings fairly came within the 
scope of the New Testament writings, and that therefore the 
omission of them condemns them. The most that we can say, 
is that the New Testament neither condemns them nor confirms 
them. It is evident that Charles Hodge is in serious error 
when he says, " Protestants answer it (the question as to can- 
onicity) by saying, so far as the Old Testament is concerned, 
that those books, and those only, which Christ and His apostles 
recognized as the written Word of God, are entitled to be 
regarded as canonical." ^ In fact, Jesus and His apostles no- 
where undertake to define the Canon of the Old Testament, 
and their incidental use of the Old Testament, when summed 
up, leaves several books undefined as to their canonicity. 

" The controversies as to the date of the formation of the Jewish 
Canon seem really to turn upon the ambiguity in the meaning of 
the word ^ canon' itself. If by 'canon' we mean the estimate of 

1 Eichhorn, I.e., I. s. 104. 2 j^de 9-14. 

3 Lines 273 seq. from Mai. 1"- 1-* ; lines 315 seq. from Zee. 14^. 

4 Lines 91 seq. from Ecclus. 4^ ; lines 86 seq. from Ecclus. 4^1 ; lines 7 seq. from 
Tobit 415. 

5 Systematic Theology, Vol. I. p. 152. 



HISTOKY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 133 

certain books as sacred and inspired, then we have proof that the 
Canon of the Old Testament existed from the time of Hillel, 
Philo, and the New Testament, if not from the time of the books 
of Maccabees and Ecclesiasticus. But if by the Canon we mean 
that this estimate was formally and authoritatively recognized and 
that a list of books was drawn up to which the estimate applied, 
then we cannot say that the Canon of the Old Testament was 
formed before the transactions at Jamnia at the end of the first 
and beginning of the second centuries."^ 

This is quite true, as we shall see later on. We have to dis- 
tinguish between individual recognition, recognition by common 
consent, and official recognition. In fact, these are three dif- 
ferent stages in the historical formation of the Canon. 

III. The Formation of the Canon of the New 
Testament 

The Canon of the New Testament began very much as the 
Canon of the Old Testament began, and it unfolded and enlarged 
itself gradually in the growth of the Christian Church. 

1. The earliest effort among the disciples of Jesus was to 
collect the words of the Lord. This was done by St. Matthew 
in his Logia.2 This collection was used in our Gospels of 
Mark, Matthew, and Luke, as a primary authority, very much 
as the Book of the Covenant was used in the several docu- 
ments of the Hexateuch. The use that was made of such logia 
by Clement, Barnabas, Hermas, and especially Papias, makes 
it clear that the Christians of their time regarded all such 
logia of the Lord as of normal divine authority. ^ 

The story of Our Lord's life early received attention. Mark 
gives the most primitive conception of the life of Jesus. The 
gospel of Mark was used by our Matthew and Luke. Our 

1 Sanday, Inspiration^ 1893, p. 123. 

2 Other collections were made, as is evident from the recently discovered 
fragment of a collection of Logia of Jesus. See facsimile, translation, and notes 
in Logia Jesu, Sayings of Our Lord, from an early Greek papyrus, discovered 
and edited, with translation and commentary, by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 
London, 1897 ; Two Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus recently discovered at 
Oxyrhynchus, by Walter Lock and William Sanday, Oxford, 1897. 

3 Holtzmann, Einleitung, 2te Aufl., Freib. 1886, s. 110 seq. 



134 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

gospel of John is probably based upon an original gospel of the 
apostle John, very much as our gospel of Matthew is based on 
the primitive Matthew. The four gospels constitute the first 
layer of the New Testament Canon. The four gospels gained 
the consensus of recognition in the Church by the middle of 
the second century, prior to Justin,^ who cites them as authori- 
tative, and represents that they were read in the churches 
alongside of the Old Testament prophets ; and to Tatian, who 
compacted them together in his Diatessaron to be the official 
gospel of the Syrian Church for several generations. ^ 

2. The next layer of the Canon was the thirteen epistles of 
Paul (Romans, 1, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1, 2 Thessalonians, 
Philippians, Philemon, Ephesians, Colossians, 1, 2 Timothy, 
Titus) and Acts. To these the epistle to the Hebrews was 
generally attached in the East but not in the West. This 
layer of the Canon had certainly gained universal recognition 
by the close of the second century. 

The first and the second layer of the Canon are alone 
recognized in the Doctrine of Addai, which gives us the primi- 
tive usage of the Ciiurch of Edessa.^ 

Zahn * says that " the two chief groups of which the New 
Testament of the Catholic Church consisted, the fourfold 
gospel and the thirteen Pauline epistles, were present as col- 
lections, and quite widely circulated, at the latest about 125. 
They must have originated, to use a round number, before the 
year 120." This is, however, an extreme position, not firmly 
supported by the evidence.^ 

3. A third layer of the Canon only gained gradual recog- 
nition. This layer eventually received the name of the Catho- 
lic Epistles. Of these, 1 Peter and 1 John were recognized 
by common consent in the second century ; but all the others, 
James, 2 Peter, Jude, 2 and 3 John, were disputed. The Eeve- 

1 Apol I. 66, 67 ; Dial 49, 100. 

2 Jiilicher, Einleitung^ 1894, s. 292 seq. 

3 Doct. Addai, p. 46. See Zahn, Gesch. d. Neutest. Kanon, I. s. 373 ; San- 
day, Studia Biblica, III. p. 245. 

* Geschichte des Neutest. Kanon, I. s. 797. 

6 Harnack, Das Neue Testament urn das Jahr £00, 1889 ; Jtilicher, Einleitungy 
1894, s. 292 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 135 

lation was also doubted or denied. All of these except James 
were lacking in the earliest S3^riac New Testament, and there 
is not a trace of any of them in Syriac Christian literature 
before 350 a.d.^ There was a large number of other writings 
besides, such as the Apocalypse of Peter, the Shepherd of 
Hermas, the Epistles of Clement, accepted by some as canoni- 
cal and by others rejected. 

The Muratorian fragment from the last years of the second 
century, representing the common opinion of Rome at the time, 
includes in its list the Gospels, Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul, 
1 and 2 John, Jude, and Revelations of John and Peter ; but 
it says that 2 John and Jude have as little right to their names 
as Wisdom to that of Solomon, and that the Revelations of 
John and Peter were not for public reading. It also states 
that the Shepherd of Hermas was only for private reading. 
Excluded from the list are Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and 
3 John. The Cheltenham list agrees with this position in 
part by omitting Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, and Jude. 

" Hebrews was saved by the value set upon it by the scholars 
of Alexandria ; the Apocalypse by the loyalty of the West ; and 
the Epistle of St. James by the attachment of certain churches in 
the East, especially as we may believe that of Jerusalem." ^ And 
again, " What a number of works circulated among the churches 
of the second century, all enjoying a greater or less degree of 
authority, only to lose it ! In the way of Gospels, those accord- 
ing to the Hebrews, according to the Egyptians, according to 
Peter; in the way of Acts, the so-called ^ Travels^ (TreptoSot) of 
Apostles, ascribed by Photius to Leucius Charinus, the Preaching 
of Peter, the Acts of Paul and Thecla ; in the way of Epistles, 
1 and 2 Clement, Barnabas; an allegory like the Shepherd of 
Hermas; a manual like the Didache; an Apocalypse like that 
of Peter. Truly it may be said that here, too, the last was first 
and the first last. Several of these works had a circulation and 
popularity considerably in excess of that of some of the books 
now included in the Canon. It is certainly a wonderful feat on 
the part of the early Church to have by degrees sifted out this 
mass of literature; and still more wonderful that it should not 
have discarded, at least so far as the New Testament is concerned, 

1 See Jtilicher, Einleitung, s. 337 seq. 

2 Sanday, Inspiration, pp. 24, 25. 



136 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

one single work which, after generations have found cause to look 
back upon with any regret. Most valuable, no doubt, many of 
them may be for enabling us to reconstruct the history of the 
times, but there is not one which at this moment we should say 
possessed a real claim to be invested with the authority of the 
Canon." ^ 

The New Testament writings were critically examined by 
Origen early in the third century. He divided them into 
three classes : (1) those universally accepted, the four Gospels, 
Acts, the thirteen Pauline Epistles, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, 
and the Apocalypse (the first and second Canons) ; (2) those 
that were to be rejected ; (3) the doubtful writings, James, 
Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John. 

Influenced by Origen, Eusebius in his Church History makes 
essentially the same classification. In the first class he includes 
all of Origen's list except Revelation, of which he says : " After 
them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse 
of John, concerning which we shall give the different opinions 
at the proper time." In the second class he mentions: Acts 
of Paul, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Barnabas, 
and the Teaching of the Apostles. He seems inclined to class 
here also the Revelation, with the Gospel to the Hebrews, for 
he says : " And besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it 
seem proper, which some, as I said, reject, but which others 
class with the accepted books. And among these some have 
placed also the Gospel according to the Hebrews, with which 
those of the Hebrews that have accepted Christ are especially 
delighted. "2 

Thus there is the same fluctuation of opinion in the third 
layer of the Canon of the New Testament that we have seen 
in the third layer of the Canon of the Old Testament, and 
outside of this layer, apocryphal and pseudepigraphical New 
Testament writings corresponding with the apocryphal and 
pseudepigraphical Old Testament writings. The many Jew- 
ish apocalypses and Sibylline oracles and Christian pseud- 
epigrapha which were written during the first and second 

1 I.e., pp. 27, 28. 

2 III. 25. See edition of McGiffert, pp. 155 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 137 

centuries B.C. and in the first and second centuries a.d. were 
cited without discrimination, excepting by a few critics such 
as Origen and Jerome.^ 

ly. The Canon of the Church 

The Christian Church made no official determination of the 
Canon of Holy Scripture at any of the great oecumenical coun- 
cils. The only definitions of the Canon that were officially 
made were by a provincial council at Laodicea in the East ; 
and by provincial synods in the West, at Hippo and Carthage ; 
and then all confirmed by the Greek Trullan council in 692 a.d. 
Their definitions represent a difference of opinion in the Catho- 
lic Church of the fourth century which persisted until the 
Reformation. 

The Council of Laodicea, composed of Bishops of Phrygia 
and Lydia in the middle of the fourth century (between 343 
and 381 A.D.), prohibited the public use of any other than 
canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. ^ 

There is a list of the canonical books in the Sixtieth Canon 
of this council, but this seems to have been a later addition. ^ 

The list excludes the apocryphal books of the Old Testa- 
ment except Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, and in other 
respects limits itself to the Canon of the Palestinian Jews. It 
gives all of the present New Testament Canon except the 
Apocalypse. This represents the critical tendencies of the 
Eastern Church. The Syrian Christians were still more criti- 
cal. The book of Chronicles is not in the ancient Syriac 
version, and is neglected by Ephraem in his commentaries. 
Theodore of Mopsuestia also excludes Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, 

1 Sanday, " Value of Patristic "Writings for the Criticism and Exegesis of the 
Bible," Expositor, February, 1880 ; Davidson, Canon, pp. 101 seq. 

2 Mansi, Concill. nov. coll., II. 574, Canon 59, 6tl oi> 8eT IdnoriKoi/s \l/a\fMoi)s 
\^y€<T6at. iv Trj eKKXriaig,, ov5^ aKavbvKTTa /3tj3X^a, aWk fx6va ra KavoviKo. ttjs KaLVTJs 
Kal TTttXaias diadrjKrjs. 

3 Its authenticity is attacked by Spittler, Krit. Untersuchung des 60 Laodic. 
Kanons, 1777 ; but defended by Bickell, Stud, und Krit. 1830, III. s. 591 seq. ; 
Hefele, Conciliengesch., I. s. 750 ; and others. Sanday, Inspiration., p. 60, says : 
*'It is generally agreed that the list appended as Can. LX. to the Council of 
Laodicea is not original." 



138 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and Job. The Nestorian Canon excludes Chronicles, Ezra, 
Nehemiah, and Esther.^ The Apocalypse of John is ignored 
by Chrysostom, Theodoret, and many others. Jerome gives 
his sanction to the Palestinian Canon of the Old Testament and 
excludes the Apocrypha. He^ recognizes that the second 
Epistle of Peter and James were deemed by some to belong to 
those authors ; that Jude was rejected by some ; that 2 and 3 
John were ascribed to the Presbyter John by some. He also 
mentions doubts as to the five Catholic epistles, Hebrews, and 
the Apocalypse. 2 The Synod of Hippo in 393 a.d. and of 
Carthage in 397 A.D., under the influence of Augustine, decided 
for the larger Canon, including the apocryphal books of the 
Old Testament and the full Canon of the New Testament. This 
opinion is sustained by the oldest Greek Uncials.* 

The Vatican Codex includes in the Old Testament the Greek 
Esdras, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Greek Esther, 
Judith, Tobit, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, and Theodotian's 
Daniel. The Sinaitic Codex has Tobit, Judith, 1 and 4 Macca- 
bees, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, the entire New 
Testament, and the Epistle of Barnabas. The Alexandrian 
Codex has Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, Theodotian's Daniel, 
Greek Esther, Tobit, Judith, Greek Esdras, 1, 2, 3, 4 Maccabees, 
Prayer of Manasseh, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, 
and in addition to the New Testament three epistles of 
Clement. 

The Cheltenham list (359 a.d.?) mentions,^ besides the 
Palestinian Canon, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, and Judith. In 
the New Testament it omits Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, and 
Jude. 

The Ethiopic Version gives a still more extensive Canon of 
the Old Testament, including the apocalypses of Ezra and 
Enoch, the martyrdom of Isaiah, and the book of Jubilee. 

1 Buhl, Kanon, s. 52. 

2 De Viris illustribus, 1, 2, 4, 9. 

3 Epistola 129 ad Dardanum. 

* See Gregory, Prolegomena, pp. 346, 355 ; Swete, The Old Testament in 
Greek according to the Septiiagint, I. pp. xvii, xx, xxii. See also pp. 195 seq. 

s See Sanday, " Cheltenham List of the Canonical Books," in Studia Bihlica, 
III. 1891, pp. 217 seq., where many valuable tables are given. 



HISTORY OF THE CANON OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 139 

The opinion of Augustine prevailed in the Western Church, 
and the limits of the Canon were by general consent the larger 
Augustinian Canon, including the Apocrypha with the Old 
Testament, and the full New Testament Canon. Jerome, how- 
ever, had influence upon a few scholars. Fewer entertained 
doubts as to such a book as Esther in the Old Testament, and 
the Apocalypse of John in the New Testament. 



CHAPTER VI 

CRITICISM OF THE CANON 

We have traced the History of the Canon of the Old and 
New Testament Scriptures and have seen its gradual forma- 
tion, at first by the recognition of the writings one after 
another by individuals, then by common consent, and at last 
by official action in the Synagogue and in the Church. The 
limits of the Canon of the Old Testament were defined by the 
official action of the Synagogue at Jamnia ; but the limits of 
the Canon were never officially defined by the Church except 
in provincial synods of limited influence and authority. This 
was the situation at the Protestant Reformation, when for the 
first time the limits of the Canon became a burning question 
in the Church. 

I. The Canon in the Reformation 

The Reformation was a great critical revival, due largely to 
the new birth of learning in Western Europe. The emigra- 
tion of the fugitive Greeks from Constantinople, after its capt- 
ure by the Turks, had planted a young Greek culture. A 
stream of thought burst forth, and poured like a quickening 
flood strong and deep over Europe. Cardinal Ximenes, with 
the aid of a number of Christian and Jewish scholars, such 
as Alphonso de Zamora, Demetrius Ducas, and Alphonso de 
Alcala, issued the world-renowned Complutensian Polyglot,. 
1513-17. The Greek New Testament was studied with avidity 
by a series of scholars, among whom Erasmus was preeminent. 
He published the first Greek Testament in 1516. Elias Levita 
and Jacob ben Chayim introduced Christians into a knowledge 
of the Hebrew Scriptures. Reuchlin laid the foundation for 

140 



CRITICISM or THE CANON 141 

Hebrew scholarship among Christians, by publishing the first 
Hebrew grammar and lexicon combined in 1506. ^ This return 
to the original text of the Old and New Testaments aroused 
the suspicions of the scholastics and monks, and the new learn- 
ing was assailed with bitterness. Even Levita had to defend 
himself against the charge of heterodox)^ for teaching Chris- 
tians the Hebrew language, the law of Moses, and the Talmud.^ 
But the Reformers took their stand as one man for the critical 
study of the Sacred Scriptures, and investigated the original 
texts under the lead of Erasmus, Elias Levita, and Reuchlin. 
This critical study of Holy Scripture raised many questions 
which had been long sleeping or whose feeble voice had been 
easily suppressed by ecclesiastical authority. It soon became 
evident to all that many doctrines and practices resting 
upon traditional custom were imperilled ; and the authority of 
the Church, especially as expressed through the papal adminis- 
tration, began to be seriously questioned. Several of the 
apocryphal books seemed to sustain doctrines and practices 
which some, of the Reformers found to be opposed to the 
teachings of the New Testament. Esther, Ecclesiastes, and 
the Song of Songs were difficult to reconcile with Christianity. 
The book of James and the Apocalypse did not seem easily to 
reconcile with the epistles of Paul. And so the canonicity of 
the apocryphal books of the Old Testament and several of the 
writings of the stricter Canon of the Old Testament and even 
of the Canon of the New Testament were suspected, doubted, 
or denied. The Protestant Reformers appealed from the tradi- 
tions of the Church and its customs, and the authority of the 
prelates and the pope, to Christ and the Holy Scriptures. This 
raised necessarily the question, which are the Holy Scriptures? 
What writings are to be regarded as canonical? The hie- 
rarchy maintained that it was the province of the Church to 
determine by its authority, as expressed through the papal ad- 
ministration, not only the interpretation of Holy Scripture, but 
also the limits of Holy Scripture, and so forced for the first 

1 Gesenius, Gesch. d. hehr. Sprache, pp. 106 seq. 

2 See his Massoreth Ha-Massoreth^ edited by Ginsburg, London, 1867, pp. 97 

seq. 



142 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

time in Christian history an official determination of the extent 
and limits of the Canon by the authority of the Church. The 
Protestant Reformers declined to recognize the authority of 
the Church in these particulars. 

Luther in his controversy with Eck said, "The Church 
cannot give any more authority or power than it has of itself. 
A council cannot make that to be of Scripture which is not by 
nature of Scripture." ^ Calvin says : 

" But there has very generally prevailed a most pernicious error 
that the Scriptures have only so much weight as is conceded to 
them by the suffrages of the Church, as though the eternal and 
inviolable truth of God depended on the arbitrary will of men." 
... '- For, as God alone is a suf6.cient witness of Himself in His 
own Word, so also the Word will never gain credit in the hearts 
of men till it be confirmed by the internal testimony of the Spirit. 
It is necessary, therefore, that the same Spirit, who spake by the 
mouths of the prophets, should penetrate into our hearts, to con- 
vince us that they faithfully delivered the oracles which were 
divinely intrusted to them." ^ 

This principle is well expressed in the 2d Helvetic Confes- 
sion, the most honoured in the Reformed Church : 

"We believe and confess the canonical Scriptures of the holy 
prophets to be the very true Word of God and to have sufficient 
authority of themselves, not of men" (Chap. I.). "Therefore in 
controversies of religion or matters of faith we cannot admit any 
other judge than God Himself, pronouncing by the holy Scriptures 
what is true and what is false ; what is to be followed, or what is 
to be avoided " (Chap. II.). 

The Galilean Confession gives a similar statement : 

"We know these books to be canonical, and the sure rule of 
our faith, not so much by the common accord and consent of the 
Church, as by the testimony and inward persuasion of the Holy 
Spirit, which enables us to distinguish them from other ecclesi- 
astical books" (IV. Art.).3 

Thus while other testimony is valuable and important, yet, 
the decisive test of the canonicity and interpretation of the 

^ Disputatio excel. D. theolog. Joh. Eccii. et Liitheri, hist.. III. pp. 129 seq. ; 
Berger, La Bible au Seizieme Siecle, Paris, 1879, p. 86. 

2 Institutes, I. 7. s gee also the Belgian Confession, Art. V. 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 143 

Scriptures is God Himself speaking in and through them to 
His people. This alone gives the fides divina. This is the 
so-called formal principle of the Reformation, no less impor- 
tant than the so-called material principle of justification by 
faith. 1 

The Reformers applied this critical test to the traditional 
theories of the Bible, and eliminated the apocryphal books from 
the Canon. They also revived the ancient doubts as to Esther, 
Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Epistle of James, 2 Peter, Jude, 
and the Apocalypse. The Reformed symbols elaborated the 
formal principle further than the Lutheran, and ordinarily 
specified the books that they regarded as canonical. In this 
they rejected the traditions of the early Christian Church. 

The Church of Rome, in accordance with its principle of 
church authority and tradition, determined the apocryphal 
books to be canonical at the Council of Trent, and defined 
officially the extent and limits of the Canon, and excluded all 
doubts and questionings on the Canon from the realm of ortho- 
doxy. The Protestant Reformers accepted the Canon of their 
symbols, excluding the apocryphal books, not because of the 
Jewish tradition, which they did not hesitate to dispute, as they 
did that of the Church itself, but for higher internal reasons. 
It is doubtless true ^ that the Reformers fell back on the author- 
ity of Jerome in their determination of the Canon, as they did 
largely upon Augustine for the doctrine of grace ; but this 
was in both cases for support against Rome in authority which 
Rome recognized, rather than as a basis on which to rest their 
faith and criticism. They went further back than Jerome to 
the more fundamental principle of the common consent of the 
believing children of God, which in course of time eliminated 
the sacred canonical books from those of a merely national and 
temporary character, because these books approved themselves 
to their souls as the very Word of God. As Dr. Charteris 
says : 

1 Dorner, Oesch. Prot. Theo., pp. 234 seq., 379 seq. ; Julius Mtiller, "Das 
Verhaltniss zwischen der Wirksamkeit des heiligeii Geistes und dem Gnaden- 
mittel des gottlichen Wortes," in his Dogmat. AbhandlungeUj 1871, pp. 139 seq. ; 
Reuss, Histoire du Canon, pp. 308 seq. 

2 W. Robertson Smith, Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 1881, p. 41. 



144 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

" The Council of Trent had formally thrown down a challenge. 
It recognized the canon because of the traditions of the Church, 
and on the same ground of tradition accepted the unwritten ideas 
about Christ and His apostles, of which the Church had been made 
the custodian. The reformers believed Scripture to be higher than 
the Church. But on what could they rest their acceptance of the 
canon of Scripture ? How did they know these books to be Holy 
Scriptures, the only and ultimate divine revelation ? They an- 
swered that the divine authority of Scripture is self-evidencing, 
that the regenerate man needs no other evidence, and that only 
the regenerate can appreciate the evidence. It follows from this, 
if he do not feel the evidence of their contents, any man may 
reject books claiming to be Holy Scripture." ^ 

It is true this test did not solve all questions. It left in 
doubt several writings which had been regarded as doubtful 
for centuries. But uncertainty as to these does not weaken 
the authority of those that are recognized as divine ; it only 
affects the extent of the Canon, and not the authority of those 
writings regarded as canonical. 

" Suppose we were not able to give positive proof of the divine 
inspiration of every particular Book that is contained in the Sacred 
Records, it does not therefore follow that it was not inspired ; and 
yet much less does it follow that our religion is without founda- 
tion. Which I therefore add, because it is well known there are 
some particular Books in our Bible that have at some times been 
doubted of in the Church, whether they were inspired or no. But 
I cannot conceive that doubt concerning such Books, where persons 
have suspended their assent, without casting any unbecoming re- 
flections, have been a hindrance to their salvation, while what they 
have owned and acknowledged for truly divine, has had sanctifying 
effect upon their hearts and lives." ^ 

This is the Protestant position. Unless these books have 
given us their own testimony that they are divine and therefore 
canonical, we do not receive them with our hearts ; we do not 
rest our faith and life upon them as the very Word of God ; 
we give mere intellectual assent ; we receive them on authority, 
tacitly and without opposition, and possibly with the dogma- 

1 "The New Testament Scriptures: their Claims, History, and Authority," 
Croall Lectures, 1882, 1883, p. 203. 

2 Ed. Calamy, Inspiration of the Holy Writings, London, 1710, p. 42. 



CKITICISM OF THE CANON 145 

tism which not unfrequently accompanies incipient doubt, but 
also without true interest in them, and true faith in their divine 
authority, and the certainty of their divine contents. The 
Canon of Holy Scripture as defined by the Reformed symbols 
may be successfully vindicated on Protestant principles. The 
Church has not been deceived with regard to it. Esther, 
Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and the Apocalypse will verify 
themselves in the hearts of those who study them. But it is 
illegitimate to first attempt to prove their canonicity and then 
their inspiration, or to rely upon Jewish Rabbinical tradition 
any more than upon Roman Catholic tradition, or to anathe- 
matize all who doubt some of them, in the spirit of Rabbi Akiba 
and the Council of Trent. The only legitimate Protestant 
method is that of the Reformers ; first prove their canonicity 
from their own internal divine testimony, and accept them as 
canonical because the Christian soul rests upon them as the 
veritable divine Word. " For he that believes what God saith, 
without evidence that God saith it; doth not believe God, while 
he believes the thing that is from God, et eadem ratione^ si con- 
tigisset Alcorano Turcica credidisset.'' ^ 

The fault with the Reformers was not in their use of this 
sure test, but in their neglect to use it with sufficient thor- 
oughness. Unfortunately they allowed themselves to be influ- 
enced by other subjective tests and dogmatic considerations. 
Thus Luther, by his exaggeration of his interpretation of the 
Pauline doctrine of justification, was unable to understand the 
Epistle of James, and spoke of it as "an epistle of straw." 
There can be no doubt that the rejection of 2 Maccabees was 
due in great measure to its support of the Roman Catholic 
doctrine of sacrifices for the dead ; ^ and that the Wisdom of 
Sirach was rejected partly, at least, because of its supposed 
countenance of the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation by 
works. Such dogmatic objections influenced greatly the Re- 
formers in their views as to the entire Apocrypha. They did 
not apply their principle in its simplicity and in its purity, but 
allowed themselves to confuse it with other less valid considera- 

1 Whichcote, Eight Letters of Dr. A. Tuckney and Benj. Whichcote., 1753, 
p. 111. 2 2 Mace. 1239-45. 



146 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

tions. This set a bad example to their successors, who were 
more subjective and dogmatic in their principles, and less 
evangelical and vital. 

Furthermore, the Protestant Reformers, in the matter of the 
Canon, were simply claiming a liberty of opinion with regard 
to the limits of the Canon which had been freely exercised by 
the early Christian Fathers, and which, indeed, had never been 
seriously questioned in the Christian Church. It was not 
necessary for them to battle against Catholic tradition, which 
indeed was undoubtedly on their side, if only they traced the 
tradition far enough backwards in the historic development of 
the Catholic Church. 

In fact, the Roman Catholics, on the one side, were claiming 
the right of the Church to define the doctrine of the Canon of 
Holy Scripture, and they exercised that right for the first time 
in Christian history. The Church had the same right to define 
the Canon of Holy Scripture as to define other Christian doc- 
trines. Unfortunately the Council of Trent was not a truly 
oecumenical council. It represented only a portion of the 
Christian Church, and therefore its definitions are the defini- 
tions of the Roman Catholic party in the Church. They do 
not represent the Greek, Oriental, and Protestant communions. 

On the other hand, the Protestant Reformers were not simply 
exercising the right of private opinion with reference to certain 
books, whether they belonged to the Canon or not ; but they 
set up a new test of canonicity, which, however true and reli- 
able it may be in itself, had not the consent of antiquity, and 
ought not to have been imposed upon Christians as a new 
dogma. When the Reformed symbols undertook to rule the 
apocrypha out from the Canon of Holy Scripture, they were 
officially limiting the Canon of Holy Scripture, no less truly 
than the Council of Trent, only they represented a much smaller 
constituency and a lesser section of the Church of Christ. 
The practical result was that the Council of Trent defined a 
larger Canon, the Reformed synods a smaller Canon. 

So long as the controversy with Rome was active and ener- 
getic, and ere the counter-reformation set in, the Protestant 
principle maintained itself ; but as the internal conflicts of 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 147 

Protestant churclies began to absorb more attention, and the 
polemic with Rome became less vigorous, the polemic against 
brethren more violent, the Reformed system of faith was built 
up by a series of scholastics over against Lutheranism, and 
Calvinistie scholastics contended against Arminianism. The 
elaboration of the Protestant Reformed system by a priori 
deduction carried with it the pushing of the principles of Prot- 
estantism more and more into the background. The authority 
of the Reformed Faith and Tradition assumed the place of the 
Roman Faith and Tradition ; and the biblical scholarship of 
Protestant churches, cut off from the line of Roman Tradition, 
sought historical continuity and worked its way back along the 
line of Hieronymian Tradition to the earlier Jewish Rabbini- 
cal Tradition ; and so began to establish a Protestant tradi- 
tional orthodoxy in the Swiss schools under the influence of 
Buxtorf, Heidegger, and Francis Turretine ; and in the Dutch 
schools under the influence of Voetius. 

Lutheran theology had the same essential development 
through internal struggles. The irenical school of Calixtus 
at Helmstadt had struggled with the scholastic spirit, until the 
latter had sharpened itself into the most radical antagonism to 
the Reformed Church and the Melanchthon type of Lutheran 
theology. Carlov stated the doctrine of verbal inspiration in 
the same essential terms as the Swiss scholastics, and was 
followed therein by the Lutheran scholastics generally. 

"It treated Holy Scripture as the revelation itself, instead of as 
the memorial of the originally revealed, ideal, actaal truth; the 
consequence being that Holy Scripture was transformed into God's 
exclusive work, the human element was explained away, and the 
original living power thrust away behind the writing contained in 
letters. Faith ever draws its strength and decisive certainty from 
the original eternally living power to which Scripture is designed 
to lead. But when Scripture was regarded as the goal, and attes- 
tation was sought elsewhere than in the experience of faith through 
the presence of truth in the Spirit, then the Reformation stand- 
point was abandoned, its so-called material principle violated, and 
it became easy for Rationalism to expose the contradictions in 
which the inquirers had thus involved themselves." ^ 

1 Dorner. System of Christian Doctrine, Vol. II, p. 186. 



148 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



II. The Canon of the British Reformation 

The Church of England was, at the Reformation, composed 
of varied elements. The Reformation in England was born of 
the native British stock of Christianity ; and yet, owing to the 
oft-repeated persecutions by Church and State, the English 
Reformers were banished to the continent, and when they 
returned, after the persecution had relaxed, they brought with 
them, — some, influences from Wittenburg ; others, influences 
from Strassburg, Basel, Zurich, and Geneva. The English 
Reformation was thus enriched by the mingling together of 
all the influences of the Reformation ; but it was also forced 
to confront the very serious problem of welding together all 
these influences. That which could not be accomplished on 
the continent could hardly be accomplished under still greater 
difiiculties in Great Britain. 

Three parties came into conflict in the British churches, — 
the more conservative Anglo-Catholic party, the more radical 
Puritan party, and the mediating or comprehensive party. 
The mediating party expressed its views on the Canon of Holy 
Scripture in the Articles of Religion. They take an inter- 
mediate position between the Protestant Reformers and the 
Roman Catholics in their doctrine of the Canon : 

" In the name of the Holy Scripture, we do understand those 
Canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose author- 
ity was never any doubt in the Church." The twenty-four books 
of the Hieronymian Canon of the Old Testament are then men- 
tioned. It then continues : " And the other books (as Hierome 
saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of 
manners : but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine." 
It then names fourteen apocryphal books, and concludes : " All the 
books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we 
do receive and account them for Canonical." (Art. VI.) 

The Articles thus base themselves on the Hieronymian tra- 
dition as the Roman Catholic Church did on the stronger 
Augustinian tradition ; but they do not claim the authority of 
the Church to define the Canon, and they do not set up any 
test of canonicity. 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 149 

The Scotch Confession of 1560, however, mamtains the 
position of the Protestant Reformers : 

'' As we beleeve and confesse the Scriptures of God sufficient 
to instruct and make the man of God perfite, so do we affirme and 
avow the authoritie of the same to be of God, and nether to depend 
on men nor angelis. We affirme, therefore, that sik as allege the 
Scripture to have na uther authoritie hot that quhilk it hes received 
from the Kirk, to be blasphemous against God, and injurious to 
the trew Kirk, quhilk alwaies heares and obeyis the voice of her 
awin spouse and Pastor ; bot takis not upon her to be maistres 
over the samin." (Art. XIX.) 

Thomas Cartwright, the chief of the English Puritans, 
takes the same view: 

^^ Q. How may these bookes be discerned to bee the word of 
God? 

" A. By these considerations following : 

"First, they are perfectly holy in themselves, and by them- 
selves : whereas all other writings are prophane, further then 
they draw holinesse from these; which yet is never such, but 
that their holinesse is imperfect and defective. 

" Secondly, they are perfectly profitable in themselves, to 
instruct to salvation, and all other are utterly unprofitable there- 
unto, any further then they draw from them. 

" Thirdly, there is a perfect concord and harmonic in all these 
Bookes, notwithstanding the diversity of persons by whom, places 
where, and time when, and matters whereof, they have been 
written. 

" Fourthly, there is an admirable force in them, to incline men's 
hearts from vice to vertue. 

" Fifthly, in great plainenesse and easinesse of stile, there 
shine th a great Majesty and authority. 

" Sixthly, there is such a gracious simplicity in the writers of 
these Bookes, that they neither spare their friends, nor them- 
selves, but most freely, and impartially, set downe their owne 
faults and infirmities as well as others. 

" Lastly, God's owne Spirit working in the harts of his children 
doth assure them, that these Scriptures are the word of God." ^ 

III. The Puritan Canon 

The Westminster Confession gives expression to the mature 
Puritan faith respecting the Scriptures : 

1 Thos. Cartwright, Treatise of the Christian Beligion, London, 1616. 



150 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

§ 2. " Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the word of God 
written, are now contained all the books of the Old and !N'ew 
Testament, which are these " (mentioning the 66 books commonly- 
received). "All which are given by inspiration of God to be the 
rule of faith and life." 

§ 3. " The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of di- 
vine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture ; and 
therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any 
otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings." 

§ 4. " The Authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought 
to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of 
any man or church, but wholly upon God, (who is truth itself,) 
the author thereof ; and therefore it is to be received, because it 
is the word of God." 

§ 5. '• We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the 
Church to an high and reverent esteem for the Holy Scripture; 
and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, 
the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope 
of the whole, (which is to give all glory to God,) the full discovery 
it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other 
incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are 
arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the 
word of God ; yet, notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assur- 
ance of the infallible truth, aud divine authority thereof, is from 
the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with 
the word in our hearts." (I. § 2-5.) 

The Westminster Confession distinguishes in its statements 
(1) the external evidence, the testimony of the Church ; (2) 
the internal evidence of the Scriptures themselves ; (3) the 
fides divina. Here is an ascending series of evidences for the 
authority of the Scriptures. The fides humana belongs strictly 
only to the first class of evidences. This testimony of the 
Church is placed first in the Confession because it is weakest. 
The second class not only gives fides humana^ but also divina^ 
owing to the complex character of the Scriptures themselves ; 
but the third class, as the highest, gives purely fides divina. 
The Confession carefully discriminates the weight of these 
evidences. The authority of the Church only induces " an 
high and reverent esteem for the Holy Scripture." The 
internal evidence of the "excellencies and entire perfection 
thereof are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 151 

itself to be the word of God " ; but our " full persuasion and 
assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof " 
come only from the highest evidence, "the inward work of 
the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our 
hearts." In accordance with this, "The authority of the Holy 
Scripture dependeth wholly upon God." ^ On this principle, 
then, the Canon is determined. The books of the Canon are 
named,2 and then it is said, "All which are given by inspira- 
tion of God to be the rule of faith and life." The apocryphal 
books are no part of the Canon of Scripture, because they are 
not of divine inspiration.^ It is, therefore, the authority of 
God Himself, speaking through the Holy Spirit, by and with 
the Word to the heart, that determines that the writings are 
infallible as the inspired Word of God, and it is their inspira- 
tion that determines their canonicity. 

Thus the Westminster Confession stated the point of view 
of the Protestant Reformers. The members of this assembly 
of divines were not as a body scholastics, though there were 
scholastics among them ; but were preachers, catechists, and 
expositors of the Scriptures, with a true evangelical spirit. 
They were called from the active work of the ministry, and 
from stubborn resistance to Prelatical authority, to the active 
work of reforming the Church of England into closer con- 
formity with the Reformed Churches of the continent. Among 
the doctrines to be reformed was the doctrine respecting the 
Holy Scripture. The Puritans were not content with the 
statement of the Articles as to the Canon. They were deter- 
mined to take an advanced Reformed position. Accordingly 
they state the three tests of canonicity and give each its 
proper place and order in the argument. In this respect they 
made an important dogmatic advance, but it was an advance 
only of a single party in the Church of England. The Pre- 
latical view is stated by Bishop Cosin : * 

" Por though there be many Internal Testimonies belonging to 
the Holy Scriptures, whereby we may be sufficiently assured, that 
they are the true and lively oracles of God, . . . yet for the par- 

* Scholastic History of the Canon, London, 1657, pp. 4 seq. 



152 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ticular and just number of such books, whether they be more or 
less, than either some private persons, or some one particular church 
of late, have been pleased to make them, we have no better nor 
other external rule or testimony herein to guide us, than the con- 
stant voice of the catholic and universal Church, as it hath been 
delivered to us upon record from one generation to another." 

This view not only antagonizes the views of the Puritans 
and continental Reformers, but it is a reaction from the mod- 
erate intermediate statement of the Articles towards the Roman 
Catholic position. 

The Puritans in the Westminster Assembly in revising 
Article VI. of the Articles of Religion erased the statements : 
" Of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church " ; 
" And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth 
read for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet 
doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine." And they 
changed the statement : " All the books of the New Testament, 
as they are commonly received, we do receive and account them 
for canonical " ; so as to read : " All which books, as they are 
commonly received, we do receive and acknowledge them to 
be given by the inspiration of God ; and in that regard, to be 
of the most certain credit, and highest authority." 

Charles Herle, the Prolocutor of the Westminster Assembly, 
states the Protestant position over against the Roman : 

" They (the Papists) being asked, why they believe the Scripture 
to be the Word of God f Answer, because the Church says 'tis so ; 
and being asked againe, why they beleeve the Church? They 
answer, because the Scripture sales it shall be guided into truth; 
and being asked againe, why they beleeve that very Scripture that 
says so? They answer, because the Church says 'tis Scripture, 
and so (with those in the Psalm xii. 8), they walk in a circle or 
on every side. They charge the like on us (but wrongfully) that 
we beleeve the Word, because it sayes it self that it is so ; but we 
do not so resolve our Faith; we believe unto salvation, not the 
Word barely, because it witnesses to itself, but because the Spirit 
speaking in it to our consciences witnesses to them that it is the 
Word indeed; we resolve not our Faith barely either into the 
Word, or Spirit as its single ultimate principle, but into the testi- 
mony of the Spirit speaking to our consciences in the Word." ^ 

1 Detur Sapienti, London, 1655, pp. 152, 153. 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 153 

The Puritans were in radical opposition to Rome. They 
were maintaining the formal principle of Protestantism. If 
they had not taken this position, they would have been 
powerless. As Reuss says : 

" ISTothing was more foreign to the spirit of Luther, of Calvin, and 
their illustrious fellow-laborers, nothing was more radically con- 
trary to their principles, than to base the authority of the Sacred 
Scriptures upon that of the Church and its tradition, to go in 
effect, to mount guard over the fathers, and range their catalogues 
in line, cause their obscurities to disappear by forced interpretations 
and their contradictions by doing violence to them, as is the custom 
of our day. They very well knew that this would have been the 
highest inconsistency, indeed the ruin of their system, to attribute 
to the Church the right of making the Bible after they had con- 
tested that of making the doctrine ; for that which can do the 
greater can do the less."^ 

There never had been a period in which the authority of 
Holy Scripture was more hotly discussed than in the times of 
the English Commonwealth. In 1647 the London ministers 
(many of whom were members of the Westminster Assembly) 
issued their testimony against false views of Holy Scripture as 
well as of other matters. They mention as 

" Errors against the Divine Authority of the Holy Scripture, That 
the Scripture, whether true Manuscript or no, whether Hebrew, 
Greek, or English, it is but human; so not able to discover a 
divine God. Then where is your command to make that your 
rule or discipline, that cannot reveal you God, nor give you power 
to walk with God ? That, it is no foundation of Christian Religion, 
to believe that the English Scriptures, or that book, or rather vol- 
ume of books called the Bible, translated out of the originall 
Hebrew and Greek copies, into the English tongue are the Word 
of God. That, questionless no writing whatsoever, whether 
translations or originalls, are the foundation of Christian Re- 
ligion." ^ 

1 Reuss, Histoire du Canon^ p. 318. 

2 A Testimony to the Truth of Jesus Christ and to our Solemn League and 
Covenant. Subscribed by the ministers of Christ within the Province of London, 
Dec. 14, 1647. London, 1648. Similar testimonies were signed in many of the 
English counties during the same year. In the McAlpin collection of the library 
of the Union Theological Seminary, N.Y., there are ten of them. 



154 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

William Lyford, an esteemed Puritan divine, wrote a com- 
mentary on this testimony of the London ministers. ^ 

After controverting the " foure fold error : (1) of them that 
would place this authority (of Scripture) in the Church ; (2) of 
them who appeale from scripture to the spirit ; (3) of them 
that make reason the supreme Judge ; (4) of them that ex- 
pound scripture according to Providences," he goes on to 
expound the position of the Puritans. 

" The authority and truth of God speaking in the Scripture, 
is that upon which our faith is built, and doth finally stay itself e : 
The ministry of the Church, the illumination of the Spirit, the 
right use of reason are the choicest helps, by which we believe, 
by which we see the law and will of God; but they are not the 
law itself ; the divine truth and authority of God's word, is that 
which doth secure our consciences. ... If you ask what it is 
that I believe ? I answer, I believe the blessed doctrines of salva- 
tion by Jesus Christ ; if you ask, why I believe all this, and why 
I will venture my soul to all eternity on that doctrine ? I answer, 
because it is the revealed will of God concerning us. If you ask 
further, How I know that God hath revealed them ? I answer, by 
a two-fold certainty ; one of faith, the other of experience ; (1) I 
do infallibly by faith believe the Eevelation, not upon the credit of 
any other Eevelation, but for itselfe, the Lord giving testimony 
thereunto, not only by the constant Testimony of the Church, which 
cannot universally deceive, nor only by miracles from heaven, bear- 
ing witness to the Apostle's doctrine, but chiefly by its own proper 
divine light, which shines therein. The truth contained in Script- 
ure is a light, and is discerned by the sons of light : It doth by 
its own light, persuade us, and in all cases, doubts, and questions, 
it doth clearly testifie with us or against us ; which light is of 
that nature, that it giveth Testimony to itself, and receiveth 
authority from no other, as the Sun is not scene by any light but 
his own, and we discerne sweet from soure by its own taste. . . . 
(2) Whereunto add, that other certainty of experience, which is a 
certainty in respect of the Affections and of the spiritual man. 
This is the Spirit's seal set to God's truth (namely), the light of 
the word; when it is thus shewen unto us, it doth work such 
strange and supernatural effects upon the soul ; ... It persuades 

1 The Plain Marl's sense exercised to discern good and evil, or A Discovery 
of the Errors, Heresies, arid Blasphemies of these Times, and the Toleration 
■of them, as they are collected and testified against by the ministers of London, 
in their Testimony to the Truth of Jesus Christ. London, 1655. 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 155 

us of the truth, and goodness of the will of God ; and of the things 
revealed; and all this by way of spiritual taste and feeling, so 
that the things apprehended by us in divine knowledge, are more 
certainly discerned in the certainty of experience, than anything 
is discerned in the light of naturall understanding." 

'^ They that are thus taught, doe know assuredly that they have 
heard God himselfe : In the former way, the light of Divine Eea- 
son causeth approbation of the things they believe. In the later, 
the Purity and power of Divine Knowledge, causeth a taste and 
feeling of the things they heare : And they that are thus estab- 
lished in the Faith, doe so plainly see God present with them in 
his Word, that if all the world should be turned into Miracles, it 
could not remove them from the certainty of their perswasion ; 
you cannot unperswade a Christian of the truth of his Religion, 
you cannot make him thinke meanly of Christ, nor the Doctrine 
of Eedemption, nor of duties of Sanctification, his heart is fixed 
trusting in the Lord. So then we conclude, that the true reason 
of our Faith, and ground, on which it finally stayeth itself, is the 
Authority of God himself, whom we doe most certainly discerne, 
and feele to speake in the word of faith, which is preached unto us."^ 

This is the true doctrine of the Puritans, in which they 
know no antagonism between the human reason, the religious 
feeling, and the Divine Spirit in the Word of God. It is a 
merciful Providence that they were guided to this position, 
for, if they had gone with the Swiss scholastics in basing 
themselves on Rabbinical tradition as to the Old Testament, 
they would have committed the British churches to errors that 
have long since been exploded by scholars. 

IV. Discussion of the Canon in the Seventeenth and 
Eighteenth Centuries 

British Christianity had to struggle with the Friends (or 
Quakers), who exalted the authority of the inner light above 
the letter of Scripture, as well as with the Roman Catholics, 
who subjected the Canon to the authority of the Church. But 
there was also the contention between the Puritan doctrine as 
stated in the Westminster Confession and the doctrine as stated 
by Bishop Cosin. Few were willing to abide by the simple 
and indefinite statement of the English Articles of Religion. 

^ I.e., pp. 39 seq. 



156 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Bishop Cosin misled Anglicans, and even later Presbyterians, 
into a false position. How can we ascertain the voice of the 
Church as to the Canon, and how determine the genuine 
Christian traditions? There is no voice of the universal 
Church. As we have seen, prior to the Reformation, only- 
provincial synods spoke, and these differed, — one following 
the Hebrew Canon and another the Greek Canon, — and thus 
exposed the differences which have always been in the Church. 

At the Reformation the Roman Catholic Council of Trent 
decided for one Canon, the Protestant synods for another Canon. 
We must wait for a reunited Christendom before the Church 
can give its authority to fix the Canon, even if it has in itself 
the divine authority to do so. The Protestant Confessions 
deny the right of the Church so to do. It remains to be seen 
whether Protestantism will ever consent to an ultimate defini- 
tion of the Canon even by the Reunited Church. 

It will hardly be claimed that we should submit the ques- 
tion of the Canon to a majority vote of the Fathers. Even 
if we were willing to do this, we could not secure the voice of 
the majority, because the writings of the majority have perished. 
It will hardly be claimed that we should follow the maximum 
of the writings regarded as canonical. If we should do this, 
we would have to enlarge the extent of the Canon beyond that 
of the Council of Trent. If we should follow the minimum, we 
would limit still more than the Protestant Canon. Shall we 
pursue the via media f But who shall define the width of even 
the middle way ? There is no pathway to certainty in any of 
these directions. 

The conflicts of conformists and non-conformists, and the 
struggle between evangelical faith and deism in Great Britain, 
and of scholasticism with pietism on the continent, caused the 
scholastics to antagonize the human element in the sacred 
Scriptures, and to assert the external authority of traditional 
opinions and of Protestant orthodoxy over the reason, the con- 
science, and the religious feeling ; while the apologists, follow- 
ing the deists into the field of the external arguments for and 
against the religion and doctrines of the Bible, built up a series 
of external evidences which were sufficiently strong to over- 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 157 

come the deists intellectually, and to drive them into atheism 
and pantheism. All this was at the expense of vital piety in 
the Church ; for the stronger internal evidence was neglected. 
The dogmatists forgot the caution of Calvin : " Those persons 
betray great folly who wish it to be demonstrated to infidels, 
that the Scripture is the Word of God, which cannot be known 
without faith "^ and they exposed the Church to the severe 
criticism of Dodwell : 

" To give all men Liberty to judge for themselves and to expect 
at the same time that they shall be of the preacher's mind, is such 
a scheme for unanimity as one would scarce imagine any one 
would be weak enough to devise in speculation, and much less 
that any could ever prove hardy enough to avow and propose to 
practice," ^ 

and led some to the conclusion that there was an " irreconcil- 
able repugnance in their natures betwixt reason and belief." ^ 

The efforts of the more evangelical type of thought which 
passed over from the Puritans into the Cambridge school, and 
the Presbyterians of the type of Baxter and Calamy, to construct 
an evangelical doctrine of the reason and the religious feeling 
in accordance with Protestant principles, failed for the time, 
and the movement died away, or passed over into the merely 
liberal and comprehensive scheme, or assumed an attitude of 
indifference between the contending parties. The Protestant 
rule of faith was sharpened more and more, especially among 
the Independents, and the separating Presbyterian churches of 
Scotland, after the fashion of John Owen, rather than of the 
Westminster divines ; whilst the apologists pressed more and 
more the dogmatic method of demonstration over against 
criticism.^ 

The Reformed faith and evangelical religion were about to 
be extinguished when, in the Providence of God, the Puritan 
vital and experimental religion was revived in Methodism, 
which devoted itself to Christian life, and so proved the saving 
element in modern British and American Christianity. 

The Churches of the continent of Europe were allowed, in 

1 Institutes^ VIII. 13. ^ Beligion not founded on Argument, pp. 90 seq. 

3 In Z.c, p. 80. * Lechler, Gesch. d. Deismus, 1841, pp. 411 seq. 



158 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the Providence of God, to meet the full force of Rationalism 
and pay the penalty of the sinful blunders of the scholastics 
of the previous century. The Canon was criticised by Sem- 
ler and his school, and canonicity became a purely historical 
question. Schleiermacher was raised up to be the father of 
modern evangelical German theology. He began to recover 
the lost ground and to build the structure of modern theology 
in the true mystic spirit on the religious feeling apprehending 
Jesus Christ as Saviour. A series of intellectual giants have 
carried on his work, such as Neander, Tholuck, Rothe, Miiller, 
and Dorner. These led German Theology back to the position 
of the Protestant Reformers and the principle of the divine 
evidence. 

It is not safe to follow the German divines in all their 
methods and statements. These depend upon the century of 
conflict which lies back of them and through which we have 
not passed. British and American theology has its own pecul- 
iar principles, methods, and work to perform. It is now in 
the crisis of its history, the same essentially that German 
theology had to meet at the close of the eighteenth century. 
The tide of thought has ebbed and flowed between Great 
Britain and the continent several times since the Reformation. 
The tide has set strongly now in our direction. 

V. A Modern American Theory of Canonicity 

In recent times another method of determining canonicity 
has been proposed. It does not have the stamp of antiquity 
upon it, it has no ecclesiastical authority behind it, and yet it 
makes loud claims of orthodoxy for itself. It has been taught 
by some modern Presbyterians that the Canon is fixed by the 
authority of the prophets who wrote the books. 

Dr. A. A. Hodge states; 

" We determine what books have a place in this Canon or divine 
rule by an examination of the evidences which show that each of 
them, severally, was written by the inspired prophet or apostle 
whose name it bears, or, as in the case of the Gospels of Mark 
and Luke, written under the superintendence and published by 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 159 

tlie authority of an apostle. This evidence in the case of the 
sacred Scriptures is of the same kind of historical and critical 
proof as is relied upon by all literary men to establish the genu- 
ineness and authenticity of any other ancient writings, such as 
the odes of Horace or the works of Herodotus. In general this 
evidence is (a) Internal, — such as language, style, and the char- 
acter of the matter they contain ; (b) External, — such as the 
testimony of contemporaneous writers, the universal consent of 
contemporary readers, and corroborating history drawn from 
independent credible sources."^ 

It is just this theory of the Canon taught by the Princeton 
school of theology and their numerous adherents, and also by 
Dr. Shedd and other theologians of other schools, that forced 
American Presbyterianism into such a serious and unreasona- 
ble war against the Higher Criticism. Dr. Shedd goes so far 
as to say: "If, as one asserts [referring to my words], 'the 
great mass of the Old Testament was written by authors 
whose names are lost in oblivion,' it was written by uninspired 
men. . . . This would be the inspiration of indefinite persons, 
like Tom, Dick, and Harry, whom nobody knows, and not of 
definite historical persons, like Moses and David, Matthew 
and John, chosen by God by name and known to men."^ 

This theory is shattered on the fact that the writings of the 
Canon do not, as a rule, give the names of their prophetic 
authors. The only reference to authors in connection with 
most of the writings of the Old Testament is in traditions 
which are not found in the earliest Hebrew manuscripts and 
authorities. Therefore, we cannot be sure of these authors. 
We cannot safely build the authority of the Canon of Holy 
Scriptures on such questionable authority as there may be in 
the names of authors whose only connection with the writings 
rests upon the uncertainties of tradition. We cannot build 
certainty on uncertainty. We cannot find divine authority 
in fluctuating human traditions. 

The five books of the Law, — the entire first Canon ; the 
four prophetic histories, — the entire first division of the sec- 
ond Canon ; are anonymous in the original Hebrew text. A 

1 Commentary on the Confession of Faith, pp. 51, 52. 

2 See my Authority of Holy Scripture, pp. 93, 94. 



160 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

very considerable portion of the four latter prophets consists 
of anonymous prophecies which have been attached to the 
prophecies which bear names. Thus all of the first Canon and 
the major part of the second Canon are anonymous. Of the 
third Canon the three former writings, Psalms, Proverbs, and 
Job, are anonymous ; of the five Rolls all are anonymous ; of 
the latter writings all three are anonymous. Thus of the entire 
Old Testament Canon the only writings which can be said to 
gain authority from the names of the authors are the four latter 
Prophets ; and with regard to these it is necessary to consider 
how little we know of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Haggai, and 
Zechariah apart from their own writings. And as for the 
minor prophets, what, apart from their writings, are Hosea, 
Amos, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, to us? And as 
for Joel and Obadiah, we cannot tell, apart from a critical study 
of their writings, when they lived, and the results of that in- 
vestigation are uncertain. And the book of Jonah is a post- 
exilic work of the imagination using the name of Jonah as a 
convenient hero for the story. Consider for a moment, in the 
light of the Higher Criticism, the absurdity of this theory of 
building the authority of the Canon on the authority of authors. 
How can they prove the canonicity of the Psalms, unless they 
build on the old traditional theory that David wrote them ? 
Some of the choicest Psalms are not fathered by any titles. 
Will they cut these out of the Psalter ? Even if all the names 
mentioned in the traditional psalms were the authors of the 
psalms which bear their names, they can only vouch for por- 
tions of the psalms as they were originally written. But who 
shall vouch for those psalms as edited and adapted to syna- 
gogue worship in our Psalter "^ To establish the authority of 
our Canon, it is of at least as much importance that the editor 
should be inspired as the original author. The final editor is 
responsible for our Psalter. Here is a case where an inerrant 
original autograph is of little value. The autograph of the 
final editor is needed, and no one proposes to name him. 

But some will say Jesus and the apostles vouch for the divine 
authority of the Psalter. True ; but was there no sufficient 
evidence that the Psalter was canonical prior to the testimony 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 161 

of Jesus Christ? Did the Old Testament wait for His au- 
thority to make it canonical ? The Hebrews did not think so 
when they put it in their third Canon. And Jesus did not 
think so, for He did not make it canonical ; He recognized it 
as already a part of the Canon. 

The scientific work of the Higher Criticism destroys this 
modern theory of the authority of the Canon and forces us 
back either upon the Roman Catholic doctrine of the authority 
of the Church, or else the opinion of the Protestant Reformers, 
as elaborated and improved and best stated in the Westminster 
Confession : 

"The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to 
be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any 
man or church, but wholly upon God, (who is truth itself,) the 
author thereof; and, therefore, it is to be received, because it is 
the word of God." ^ 

This principle of establishing the Canon lifts it above mere 
ecclesiastical authority, far above the speculations of dogma- 
ticians and fluctuating traditions, and builds it on the rock 
summit of the authority of God Himself. 

It was ever the internal divine evidence and the holy char- 
acter of Holy Scriptures that persuaded the ancients of their 
canonicity, and these evidences have persuaded devout souls 
in all times. 

But some say : you are giving every man the right to make 
his own Bible. Not so ; criticism takes from every denomina- 
tion of Christians and from tradition and from the theologians 
their spurious claims to determine the Canon of Holy Scripture 
for all men ; but it does not give that authority to any indi- 
vidual man. It puts the authority to determine His Holy 
Word in God Himself. It teaches us to look for the divine 
evidence in the Holy Scriptures themselves. It tells us to 
open our minds and hearts and submit ourselves to the mes- 
sage of the Divine Spirit and accept the Bible God has made 
for us. But it does tell every man to make up his own mind 
as to the authority of the writings which are said to belong to 
Holy Scripture. It endorses the right of private judgment in 

11.4. 



162 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

this matter as in all others. It makes the divine authority of 
the Canon, and of every Avriting in the Canon, a question 
between every man and his God. 

The Princeton school of theology has misled the Presbyterian 
Church into a false position, which is neither that of the Roman 
Catholic Church, nor that of the Protestant Reformers or 
British Puritans, nor the intermediate and cautious position 
of the Anglican divines. They have incautiously risked the 
Canon of Holy Scripture with the traditional theories of 
authorship and the results of the Higher Criticism. They 
have induced a recent Presbyterian General Assembly to de- 
cide against an orthodox opinion and in favour of heterodoxy. 

It is perilous to follow these blind guides of British and 
American scholasticism and fall into the ditch that lies in their 
path.i It is wise to learn from the experience of those who 
have passed through the conflict and achieved the victory. It 
is prudent to do all that is possible to prevent the ruin to 
American Christianity that is sure to come if ecclesiastical 
leaders continue to commit the old blunders over again. The 
revival of true vital religion, and the successful progress of 
theology in the working out of the principles inherited from 
the Protestant Reformation, depend upon a speedy reaction 
from the scholastic theology of the Zurich Consensus and the 
exaggerated Puritanism of John Owen and the provincial 
types of theology, and a renewal of the life and unfettered 
thought of the Reformation and of British Christianity in the 
first half of the seventeenth century. 

It is the inevitable result of research into the Canon of Holy 
Scripture that the last word should be spoken by Holy Script- 
ure itself. It is the Divine Spirit alone who gave the divine 
evidence in the past and upon whom we must rest for our 
evidence in the present and the future. We cannot be certain 
that anything comes from God unless it bring us personally 
something evidently divine. If the Divine Spirit has left some 
of the ancient writings in doubt in the minds of some of the 
ancients, and some with less internal and external evidence 
than others, this is not to question the divine voice, which gives 

1 Mt. 1514. 



CRITICISM OE THE CANON 163 

certainty to those who are capable and willing to receive it. 
It should stir us up to a more thorough study of these Holy 
Scriptures, lest in some way we should not have discerned that 
divine evidence which has been graciously imparted to students 
who may have been more faithful or more devoted than our- 
selves. We should maintain our own freedom to question and 
to reject from the Canon such writings as do not justify them- 
selves in the arena of criticism ; and at the same time we 
should respect the opinion of those who think that they have 
evidence that we have thus far been unable to receive, and 
above all we should be extremely reluctant to dissent from the 
historic consensus of the Christian Church in this matter, and 
especially the official deliverances of Holy Church. 

VI. The Determination of the Canon 

It has become more and more evident, since Semler ^ reopened 
the question of the Canon of Holy Scripture, that the only safe 
position is to build on the rock of the Reformation principle of 
the Sacred Scriptures. This principle has been enriched in 
two directions, — first, by the study of the unity and harmony 
of the Sacred Scriptures as an organic whole, and, second, by 
the apprehension of the relation of the faith of the individual 
to the consensus of the Church. 

The principles on which the Canon of Holy Scripture is to 
be determined are, therefore, these : 

(1) The testimony of the Church, going back by tradition 
and written documents to primitive times, presents probable 
evidence to all men that the Scriptures, recognized as of divine 
authority and canonical by such general consent, are indeed 
what they are claimed to be. 

This testimony is quite unanimous as to the entire Protestant 
Canon. The Roman Catholic Church testifies to the apocry- 
phal Books of the Old Testament in addition. The testimony 
of the Church from the fourth until the sixteenth century is 
overwhelmingly in favour of the apocryphal books likewise. 
In the Canon of the Church the historic testimony of its 
1 Abhandlung vonfreier Untersuchung des Kanon, 4 Bde. 1771-1776. 



164 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

formation is strongest as to the Law in the Old Testament and 
the Gospels in the New Testament, next strongest as to the 
Prophets in the Old Testament and the book of Acts and the 
Pauline epistles in the New Testament. In the third layer of 
the Canon of the Old Testament the Psalter, Proverbs, Job, 
and Daniel, have the authority of the New Testament, and 
Ruth and Lamentations have never been doubted ; in the third 
layer of the Canon of the New Testament, 1 Peter and 1 John 
seem to have remained undoubted from the second century. 
As regards all of these books the historical evidence is so 
strong that it could hardly be stronger. As regards the books 
of Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah. and 
Chronicles, these have all had to battle for recognition in the 
Canon from the most ancient times, and doubts and denials 
have arisen in modern times. The same may be said of James, 
2 Peter, Jude, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation in the New Testa- 
ment. These may with propriety be regarded as having a 
lower grade of evidence ; and men may be permitted to doubt 
their canonicity without censure now as they were in ancient 
times. The historical evidence for all of these is very strong. 
They have all won their way into the Canon after a stout and 
long-continued struggle, and they have all maintained their 
place and resisted every subsequent attack upon them. We 
may also be permitted to say that it is doubtful whether the 
ultra-Protestant hostility can be maintained against all the 
apocryphal books. The Wisdom of Sirach and the Wisdom 
of Solomon are in the Roman Catholic Canon, and are used in 
the liturgy of the Church of England. They impress many 
minds more favourably than Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs. 
1 Maccabees is also in the Roman Catholic Canon, and seems 
to be in itself an important if not an essential book in the 
development of Biblical History. There are many who derive 
more religious benefit from- it than from Esther. The Bene- 
dicite of the three children, inserted in the Greek Version of 
Daniel, has been used from the earliest times in Christian wor- 
ship, and has indeed exerted a more sacred influence than the 
whole of the Hebrew Daniel. The tendency among thoughtful 
Protestants is to restore these writings to the Canon. 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 165 

(2) The Scriptures themselves, in their pure and holy 
character, satisfying the conscience ; their beauty, harmony, 
and majesty, satisfying the aesthetic taste ; their simplicity and 
fidelity to truth, together with their exalted conceptions of 
man, of God, and of history, satisfying the reason and the 
intellect ; their piety and devotion to the one God, and their 
revelation of redemption, satisfying the religious feelings and 
deepest needs of mankind, — all conspire to convince that they 
are indeed sacred and divine books. 

This argument will appeal to different men in different 
ways. It will depend partly upon the Higher Criticism of the 
Scriptures, partly upon their interpretation, and upon Biblical 
History and Biblical Theology. The books of Jonah, Esther, 
and Daniel will appeal to some minds much more powerfully 
if they are seen to be historical fiction than if they appear to 
be historical books full of legends and mistakes. The Song 
of Songs will commend itself as canonical to a man who dis- 
cerns it to be a drama of marital love, when he could not accept 
it if it were supposed to be merely an allegory of the love of 
Christ to His Church, or a collection of love songs. Ecclesi- 
astes might be rejected by a man, if all its sayings were 
regarded as equally authoritative, but accepted if he were 
able to distinguish the God-fearing words from the sceptical 
words. It depends in great measure upon the kind of history, 
religion, and morals one finds in the biblical writings how far 
he will be convinced that they are divine books. Many men 
have been driven away from the Bible by the false science, 
gloomy religion, and immoral theology that Christian teachers 
have too often obtruded upon it. If the Bible is to exert the 
influence of its own character upon men, it must be stripped 
entirely free from all the false characteristics that have been 
attributed to it. If men are not won by the holy character 
of the biblical books, it must be because for some reason their 
eyes have been withheld from seeing it. 

(3) The Spirit of God bears witness by and with the par- 
ticular writing, or part of writing, in the heart of the believer, 
removing every doubt and assuring the soul of its possession 
of the truth of God, the rule and guide of the life. This argu- 



166 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ment is of no value except to a believer, to a devout Christian. 
But to such an one it is the invincible divine argument. 

(4) The Spirit of God bears witness by and with the sev- 
eral writings in such a manner as to assure the believer in the 
study of them that they are the several parts of one complete 
divine revelation, each writing having its own appropriate and 
indispensable place and importance in the organism of the 
Canon. 

This is a cumulative argument. The certainty that one 
writing in the Bible is divine, makes it easier to recognize 
another writing. If the character of one canonical book has 
been discerned, it is easier to recognize another book having 
that same character. As the number of books increases about 
which there is certainty, the difficulties as regards the others 
decrease. Practically there is little if any doubt in the minds 
of Christians as regards the great majority of the biblical 
books. Only a few of them are doubted now by any Chris- 
tians. Only a few have ever been doubted. The path of 
certainty is from the known to the unknown. Furthermore, 
the structure of the Canon is of immense importance. We 
have seen its historic importance. It has also an inductive 
importance. The books of the Bible constitute an organic 
whole under the two Covenants. When the mind has studied 
them thus organically, the Divine Spirit guides in their organic 
study and so gives what may be regarded as organic certainty ; 
that is, the certainty that the books have their essential place 
in the organism of the Divine Word. 

(5) The Spirit of God bears witness to the Church as an 
organized body of such believers, through their free consent in 
various communities and countries and centuries, to this unity 
and variety of the Sacred Scriptures as the one complete and 
perfect Canon of the divine word to the Church. 

This argument is really the old historic argument fortified 
by the vital argument of the divine evidence. The testimony 
of the Church as an external human historical organization 
cannot give certainty. But Avhen we come to know that the 
Church has been guided by the Divine Spirit in all the centuries, 
first in the formation of the Canon of Holy Scripture, and then 



CRITICISM OF THE CANON 167 

in its recognition of the Canon in the three stages, — individual 
recognition, consensus, and official determination ; that the 
same Holy Spirit who gives certainty to-day has given cer- 
tainty to the Church in all the ages of the past, working in 
the individual and also in the entire organism, — then we may 
know that the testimony of the Church is the testimony of the 
Divine Spirit speaking in the Church and through the Church. 
We recognize the same voice in the Bible and in the Church 
and in our own Reason. The argument is complete, because 
the Divine Spirit has spoken to us with the same voice and to 
the same effect through the three media in which alone He 
speaks to man. The official fixing of the Canon by the Church 
varies as to the apocryphal books alone. The tendency among 
Protestants is back to the Apocrypha. It is altogether proba- 
ble that if we could have a reunited Church, the Church would 
define a Canon with unanimous consent. 

The logical order of the testimony is this : the human testi- 
mony, the external evidence, attains its furthest possible limit 
as probable evidence, bringing the inquirer to the Scriptures 
with a high and reverent esteem of them. Then the internal 
evidence exerts its powerful influence upon his soul, and at 
length the divine testimony lays hold of his entire nature and 
convinces and assures him of the truth of God and causes him 
to share in the consensus of the Christian Church. 

" Thus the Canon explains and judges itself ; it needs no foreign 
standard. Just so the Holy Spirit evokes in believers a judg- 
ment, or criticism, which is not subjective, but in which freedom 
and fidelity are combined. The criticism and interpretation, which 
faith exercises, see its object not from without, as foreign, or as 
traditional, or as in bondage, but from within, and abiding in its 
native element becomes more and more at home while it ascribes 
to every product of apostolic men its place and proper canon- 
ical worth." " True faith sees in the letter of the documents of 
Revelation the religious content brought to an immutable objec- 
tivity which is able to attest itself as truth by the divine Spirit, 
which can at once warm and quicken the letter in order to place 
the living God-man before the eyes of the believer." ^ 

1 Corner, System der Christlichen Glaribenslehre, Berlin, 1879, I. pp. 667 
tem of Christian Doctrine, EdinlDurgh, 1881, II. pp. 229 seq. 



168 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The reason, the conscience, and the religious feeling, all of 
which have arisen during these discussions of the last century 
into a light and vigour unknown and unanticipated at the 
Reformation, should not be antagonized the one with the other, 
or with the Spirit of God, but should all be included in that 
act and habit of faith by which we apprehend the Word of God. 
These cannot be satisfied by the external authority of scholars 
or schools, of Church or State, of tradition or human testimony, 
however extensive, but only by a divine authority on which 
they can rest with certainty. Men will recognize the canon- 
ical writings as their Holy Scripture, only in so far as they 
may be able to rise through them as external media to the 
presence of their Divine Master, who reigns in and by the 
Word which is holy and divine, in so far and to that extent 
that it evidently sets Him forth. 

As I have elsewhere said : "It is the testimony of human 
experience in all ages that God manifests Himself to men and 
gives certainty of His presence and authority. There are 
historically three great fountains of divine authority — the 
Bible, the Church, and the Reason. "^ 

Men will recognize the Divine Voice whenever and wherever 
it speaks to them. Some men are convinced as to the truth by 
the Divine Voice speaking through the Church alone, others 
by the Divine Spirit speaking through the Bible, and still 
others only through the witness in their own Reason. Blessed 
be he who knows the voice of the Spirit equally well in the 
three relations. 

1 See Briggs, Authority of Holy Scripture^ An Inaugural Address, 9tli edition, 
1896, pp. 25 seq. ; Briggs, The Bible., the Churchy and the Beason^ 2d edition, 
1894, pp. 57 seq. 



CHAPTER VII 

HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 

Textual Criticism has to determine the Text of the Bible. 
It is necessary to study the history of the Text, and then apply 
the pjrinciples of Textual Criticism to manuscripts, versions, and 
citations, and so endeavour to ascertain the original text upon 
which they all depend. The Text of the Bible has passed 
through similar changes to those that are manifest in all other 
kinds of literature. The citations of the Bible have the same 
indefiniteness and the same variations from the original as cita- 
tions from other writings. The Versions have the same diffi- 
culties and departures from the original as other translations. 
The manuscripts have gone through the same experiences of 
wear and tear as other manuscripts. The same mistakes of 
copyists have been made, — by omission, insertion, transposition, 
haste, and indistinctness of vision or utterance. The same use 
of conjecture has been made by scribes to remove difficulties 
and errors. 

I. The Original Text of the Hebrew Bible 

The history of the Text of the Old Testament begins with 
the history of the Canon. The earliest Canon was written 
upon tables of stone, — the Ten Words upon two tables, the 
Words of the Book of the Covenant in pentades and decalogues 
upon several tables.^ The Deuteronomic code of law was 
written on a roll, probably of skin. Jeremiah's collection of 
prophecies was written on a similar roll, and so were all the 

1 See Briggs' Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, 1897, pp. 6 
seq., 181 seq., 189 seg., 211 seq. Cf. Dt. 272-4; Jos. 832. 

169 



170 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

sacred writings of the Old Testament from that time onward. 
It is probable that papyrus was used for private manuscripts ; 
but for public manuscripts it is improbable that anything else 
than skin was used.^ In ancient times each sacred writing 
was written upon a separate roll. The first layer of the 
Hebrew Canon, the Law, was probably written on several 
skins, eventually on five, corresponding with the five books 
which gave their name to the Pentateuch. The second layer 
of the Canon was written on eight rolls. The twelve minor 
Prophets were written sometimes on separate rolls, as is 
evident from the differences of arrangement in the earliest 
Hebrew and Greek manuscripts ; but usually on the same roll, 
after their number was definitely fixed in the Canon. The 
third layer of the Canon was for a long time as indefinite in 
the number of rolls as in the number of writings which were 
supposed to constitute it.^ 

The first Canon was certainly written in the ancient Hebrew 
alphabet, which was a variety of the Phoenician script, such 
as that used on ancient Maccabean coins, in the Siloam in- 
scription, and on the Mesha Stone. ^ The Samaritan codex of 
the Pentateuch is still preserved in characters of the same 
essential type. That was the sacred alphabet of the Canon, 
when the Samaritans separated from the Jews of Jerusalem.* 

According to the Talmud, on the authority of Mar Zutra of the 
fourth century, or Mar TJkba of the third century, " The Law was 
at first given to Israel in Hebrew writing and in the sacred lan- 
guage ; but in the time of Ezra, the Law was given a second time 
in Assyrian writing and in the Aramaic language. Then they 
chose for Israel the Assyrian writing and the sacred language, 
and they left to the Idiots the Hebrew writing and the Aramaic 
language." There can be no doubt from the context that by "the 
Idiots " was meant the Samaritans, and that the Assyrian writing 
is that of the square Aramaic character.^ This statement con- 

1 Jer. SQ'^ ««3- See Loisy, Histoire Critique du Texte et des Versions de la 
Bible, 1892, Tom. l^r, pp. 95 seq. 

2 See pp. 124 seq. ^ See p. 48. * See pp. 121, 185. 

5 Talm. Bab. Sank.., 22 a. See Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the 
Books of Samuel, 1890, pp. ix. seq. ; Neubauer, Stndia Biblica, III., 1891, 
pp. 9 seq. ; and Ginsburg, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible., 1897, pp. 288 seq.., 
— all of whom give the original and translation. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 171 

firms what is plain from other sources of information : that the 
Samaritans had retained the Law in the old Hebrew writing, and 
that the Jews had adopted the Aramaic writing in its stead. In 
other respects this statement is either false or purely conjectural. 
It is not true that the Samaritans used the Aramaic language for 
the Law. The Samaritan codex is in the Hebrew language as 
well as the Hebrew writing. The Samaritans made a Targum, or 
popular translation of the Law, in the Samaritan language ; but 
the Jews did precisely the same, making an Aramaic Targum for 
Palestine and the East, and a Greek Targum for Egypt and the 
West. There is no historic evidence that the Jews abandoned the 
old Hebrew writing because of any influence from the Samaritans. 
There is no historic evidence for the opinion that Ezra introduced 
the Aramaic writing. It is altogether improbable that he gave 
the Law in the Aramaic language, and that subsequently the 
scribes returned to the original Hebrew text of it. Neubauer 
defends the tradition so far as the writing is concerned,^ princi- 
pally on the ground that, if the Hebrew characters had once 
impressed their sanctity " on the mind of the nation through their 
use in transcribing Scripture," they would never have been aban- 
doned. He thinks, therefore, that the two kinds of writing 
existed side by side from the time of Ezra until the Maccabean 
age. But this argument, if sound, is equally valid as regards the 
statement of these Sopherim that the Law was given by Ezra 
in the Aramaic language. If the Law had been given by Ezra in 
the Aramaic language and the Aramaic script, the writing would 
have sustained the language and the language the writing, and 
neither would have been abandoned. But the Samaritans would 
not have retained the Hebrew writing and the Hebrew language 
of the Law under these circumstances, especially as we now know 
that the law code of the present Pentateuch did not exist for the 
Jews until Ezra brought it to them.^ The statement that Ezra 
gave the Law in the Aramaic language is not at present defended 
by any one. The opinion that Ezra gave the Law in Aramaic 
characters is in the same sentence of the Talmud. The discredit- 
ing of the one clause discredits likewise the other. It is not 
worthy of any more consideration in itself, and there is no 
historic evidence whatever to sustain it. 

We have at present no means of determining when the 
Aramaic characters were introduced for the canonical writings. 
It seems probable that this change took place at first among 

1 Z.c, p. 13. 2 See pp. 822 seq. 



172 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the Jews of Mesopotamia and Babylon, especially in the private 
manuscripts, and then extended over the Aramaic-speaking 
world even into Egypt, where the Jews were under Aramaic 
influence until the Greek conquest under Alexander. The 
irresistible tendency was to use the Aramaic writing with the 
Aramaic language, and to transliterate the old Hebrew char- 
acters, which were constantly growing unfamiliar even to 
scholars. The only restraining influence would be in Palestine, 
and especially at Jerusalem, the centre and capital of the Jews' 
religion. 

During the earlier Maccabean wars most of the copies of 
the Law were destroyed by the Syrian oppressors. The pious 
Jews of Palestine had to resort to their Eastern or their Egyp- 
tian brethren for manuscripts. These manuscripts were prob- 
ably written in Aramaic characters. Few manuscripts written 
in the old Hebrew characters were now left, and these were 
gradually crowded out of use.^ It is probable, therefore, that 
it was first in the Maccabean age that the authoritative codices 
of the Law were written in the Aramaic characters. And it 
may be that the collection of sacred books made by Judas Mac- 
cabeus was in this writing. ^ 

The second layer of the Canon, the Prophets, was not only 
originally written in the Hebrew writing, but it is also ex- 
tremely probable that the Prophets were collected into the 
Canon in Hebrew writing. They were all composed and col- 
lected before the Maccabean age. This is evident from the 
fact that there are many errors in transmission, which can be 
explained only from a confusion of letters which were dissimilar 
in the Aramaic alphabet, and only similar in the old Hebrew 
alphabet. 2 

The writings of the third Canon extend into the Maccabean 
age. It is probable that all those written before this time 
were written in the old Hebrew letters. But the book of 
Daniel gives us several chapters in the Aramaic language. 
This was doubtless written in the Aramaic writing, and it is 

1 See Neubauer, Studia Biblica, III. p. 14. 2 2 Mace. 2i*. 

3 Graetz {Krit. Cora. z. d. Psalmen, s. 130 seq.) and Ginsbiirg (Introduction, 
pp. 291-295) give examples from Judges, Samuel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 173 

probable that the Hebrew which incorporated it was also writ- 
ten in Aramaic characters. It may Avell be that Esther and 
Ecclesiastes were originally written in Aramaic characters, as 
well as many of the Apocrypha. There can be little doubt 
that the Psalter/ Proverbs,^ Job, and Lamentations were origi- 
nally written with the ancient letters. It is also probable in 
the case of Ezra,^ Nehemiah, Chronicles, and Ruth. It is 
doubtful with the other writings. 

During this period of the formation of the official Canon, 
and of the substitution of the Aramaic characters for the 
Hebrew, there were certain changes in the text which have left 
their permanent traces. 

(a) Emendations were made chiefly for religious reasons. 

The substitution of the word Lord, ^3^^^, for the divine name 
Yahiveh, mJl'', was certainly prior to the earliest layer of the 
Septuagint Version; for Kvpios is constantly substituted for it. 
There are traces of such substitution in the Hebrew text itself. 

The substitution of Bosheth, H^D, shame, for Baal, bV'Z, the god 
of the Canaanites, and also for Baal in proper names compounded 
with Baal, was made before the Septuagint translation of the 
Prophets, but was not thoroughly carried out in all the texts.* 
The change in proper names is usual in Samuel, where the 
Chronicler preserves the original form.^ This seems to indicate 
that this change was made by the scribes chiefly in the time 
before the final admission of Chronicles into the Canon. The 



1 Perles (AnaleJcten, 1895, pp. 50 seq.) gives examples of errors in the Psalter 
and Job, which can only come from the ancient Hebrew letters. 

2 Baumgartner (I^tude critique sur Vl^tat du Texte du Livre des Proverbes, 
Leipzig, 1890) makes it plain that, while the larger proportion of the errors of 
transliteration in the text of Proverbs is due to mistakes in the distinguishing 
of similar letters of the Egyptian xiramaic alphabet, and a smaller number to 
mistakes in the older Aramaic alphabet, there is still a limited number that can 
be explained only by the ancient Hebrew alphabet. 

3 Ginsburg (Introduction, p. 293) gives Ezra 6* as an example of a mistake 
oiAle^htoY Tav in the old Hebrew alphabet. But Baumgartner (I.e., s. 279) 
thinks that such mistakes might be as well explained from the ancient Aramaic 
alphabet also. 

4 Cf . V ^da\, Jer. 223, 79^ 1113. 17^ 195 . Hos. 2io, 13i ; Kom. 11^ ; which implies 
the reading of ala-x^^v for jSdaX. See Dillmann, Baal mit d. vmhl. Artikel. in 
the Monatsberichte d. Konigl. Acad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1881. 

5 However, in 2 Sam. ll^i the Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate versions all 
read bU3"i'', and in 2 Sam. 23^ Lucian's text of the Septuagint preserves 'leo-jSdaX. 



174 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

same is true of the reading of Shame, Bosheth, tW^, for King, 
MeleJch, ^^^, when applied to the god of the Ammonites.^ 

(5) The earlier scribes also acted as editors. They divided 
first the Law and then the Psalter into five books. These 
divisions are not logical divisions. The natural divisions in 
both cases would, be into three books. The divisions are me- 
chanical, and they were doubtless made for liturgical reasons. 
Another ancient division for both the Law and the Psalter, 
into seven books, is mentioned in the Talmud. ^ These divi- 
sions all may have reference to the use of the Law and the 
Psalter at the feasts of the Jews. 

(tf) The scribes also divided the sacred books into sections. 
These sections do not correspond altogether with the later sec- 
tions of the Talmudic and Massoretic periods, but they were 
doubtless arranged for public reading in the synagogues. Two 
such sections are mentioned in the New Testament. ^ 

(c?) No verses are known so far as prose writings are con- 
cerned ; but the ancient poems in the historical books, and the 
poetical books of Psalms, Lamentations, and the Wisdom 
Literature, were certainly written in distich, tristich, tetrastich, 
and the like. It is probable that the greater portion of the 
poetry in other books was written in this way also. This 
enabled Josephus and even Jerome to speak of trimeters, tetram- 
eters, and hexameters. But this method of writing poetry 
was subsequently lost, except for the ancient poems in the 
Pentateuch, because of the Massoretic system of accentuation 
for cantilation in the synagogue.* 

II. The Text of the Canon of the Sopherim 

There is no evidence of any attempt to establish an official 
Hebrew text until after the destruction of Jerusalem by the 

iLev. 1821 (Sept. B dpx<^v)', 202-^ (Sept. dpxo}^); 1 K. lU (Sept. jSacriXeiJs) ; 
2 K. 2310 (Sept. M6Xox) ; Jer. 3235 (gept. Mo\bx ^a<n\e{>s). 

2 Talm. Shahhoth, 115 6, 116 a; Midrash Bereshith Babba, LXIV. fol. 71 d, 
Num. 10-^5 ; Vayyikra Babba, Lev. 9i ; Rashi on Prov. Qi. 

8 The section of the Bush iirl rod ^drov Mk. 1226, referring to Ex. 3, and 4p 
'RXeig. Rom. IP, referring to the story of Elijah, 1 K. 19, are the only two known 
to the New Testament. 

* See Chap. XIV. pp. 362, 363. 



HISTORY OE THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 175 

Romans in 70 a.d. There was indeed a codex of the Law in 
the temple, which was taken by Titus to Rome among the 
spoils.-^ But the ancient Greek Version, the ancient Syriac 
Version, the earliest Aramaic Targums, and the citations in the 
New Testament, the Book of Jubilees,^ and other writings of 
the first and second centuries B.C. and the first century A.D., 
make it evident that there was no official Hebrew text until the 
second century a.d. 

After the destruction of Jerusalem the scribes made a rally 
at Jamnia, where they established a school and held several 
assemblies.^ They determined the extent of the Canon and 
occupied themselves with fixing the text of the manuscripts 
which had been saved from the wreck of war. There can be 
no doubt that Rabbi Akiba and his associates at Jamnia not 
only fixed the Canon of the Old Testament, but also established 
the first official Hebrew text of the Canon.* There is a fixture 
in the consonantal text of Hebrew manuscripts from the second 
century onwards, which can be accounted for only by the 
establishment at that time of such an official text.^ This text 
was established in troublous times, when it was impossible to 
give the time and painstaking required for such an undertak- 
ing. There was no leisure to correct even the plainest mis- 
takes.^ It was made by the comparison of a few manuscripts. 
Tradition speaks of three, in cases of disagreement the majority 
of two always determining the correct reading. 

1 Josephus, B. J"., VII. 5, § 5. This is said to have been given by tlie Em- 
peror Severus, about 220 a.d., to a synagogue built by him at Rome. Ginsburg, 
(l.c.^ pp. 410 seq.) gives a list of thirty -two readings said to have been taken 
from this codex. 

2 The Book of Jubilees, or Little Genesis, as it is sometimes called, testifies to 
a text somewhat different from that of the Sopherim. See Dillmann, Beitrdge 
axis. d. Buck d. JuhUaen z. Kritik. d. Pentateuch-Textes^ Sitzungsberichte d. 
Konig. Preus. Akad. der Wissenschaften, 1883. The same is true with reference 
to other pseudepigrapha. 

3 See pp. 130, 131. 

* See Bacher, Hebr. Sprachwissenschaft, 1892, s. 2. 

^ Olshausen, Psahnen, s. 18 ; Lagarde, A^im. z. Griecli. Uehersetzung d. Pro- 
verbien, 1863, s. 444 seq. ; Kuenen, Gesammelte Abha7idhmgen, 1894, s. 83 seq. 
This is denied by Hermann Strack, in Semitic Studies in 3Iemory of A. Kohut, 
1897, p. 571, on the ground that he has found in ancient manuscripts a very 
great number of various readings which are unknown to scholars. 

6 Cornill, Uzechiel, 1886, s. 10. 



176 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Sopherim found in the court of the temple the codex ''ll!?^, 
and the codex ''tSltO!?!, and the codex ^^1^. In one they found 
written Ulp ^rh^ ]M^t2 (Deut. 33^^), and in two written n3:;D 
Ulp ^'^T'i^; and they accepted two, and rejected one. In one 
they found written biO'^^ ^0^ ^tOltfi^n n^ nbtT^I (Ex. 24^), and 
in two written h^^^^ ^32 n!?3 Ti^ rh^^); and they accepted 
two, and rejected one. In one they found written nine times i^^'^ 
instead of i^lH, and in two written eleven times K^'^; and they 
accepted the two, and rejected the one.^ 

Some scholars think that all manuscripts varying from the 
official text were ruthlessly destroyed. ^ Whether this was so 
or not, it is altogether probable that the destruction of manu- 
scripts during the war of Hadrian (132-135 A.D.) would so 
reduce the number of competing manuscripts, that the official 
manuscripts of the scribes would gain the supremacy. 

The official text of the Hebrew Bible in the second Christian 
century was composed of consonantal letters alone. Even the 
quiescent letters,^ which were used in ancient times, before the 
invention of vowel points, to indicate the vowel in difficult 
words, were not used with any precision ; ^ and later scribes 
were free to exercise their own judgment in the use of them. 
And so the Massoretic text perpetuates a great lack of uni- 
formity and even inaccuracy of usage. The text used by the 
translators of the Septuagint was without separation of words 
and without the final letters, and also with occasional abbrevia- 
tions ; but the Sopherim of the second and third centuries 
made the separation of words, introduced the five final letters, 
and removed all abbreviations.^ The work of the Sopherim 
continued until the sixth century, when the Massorites began 
their labours. The work of the Sopherim, as described in the 
Talmud and early Rabbinical commentaries, was : 

(1) the fixing of the pronunciation of certain words; 

(2) the removal of certain superfluous particles from the text; 

1 Jerusalem Taanith^ IV. 2 ; Sopherim, VI. 4. See Ginsburg, Introduction 
to Hebr. Bible, pp. 408, 409, who gives text and translation. 

2 Noldeke, migenMd's Zeitschr if t, 1873, s. 444 seq. ; W. R. Smith, Old Testa- 
ment in the Jewish Church, 2d ed., pp. 62 seq. 

* Ginsburg, Introduction, pp. 187 seq.; Perles, Aaalekten, s. 35. 
5 Ginsburg, Introduction, pp. 297 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 177 

(3) the mention of words which, though not written, yet 
ought to be read, and the designation of words which, though 
written, ought not to be read. 

The Babylonian Tahiiud gives these three under the technical 
terms: (1) OnSID ^^p^; (2) D^SID ^)^^V ; (3) ^b) p^p 
p^nD, pnp ^^) p^n:D1. As examples of the first are, pi^ 
when alone or preceded by the article, D^^t^» D^*lii^. The second 
gives five instances in which the conjunction Waw, omd, is to be 
omitted (Gen. 18^ 24-; Nu. 31^; Pss. 36^ 68^*^). The third men- 
tions that n^S, Euphrates, is to be inserted (2 Sam. 8'"^) ; tT^^, man 
(2 Sam. 16^'^) ; D'^^D, they are coming (Jer. 31'''^) ; hS, to her (Jer. 
50^); m (Ruth 2^1); ^'^^, to me (Ruth 3^' ^0; and the following 
words are not to be read : J^3 (2 K. 5^«) ; n^l (Jer. 32") ; "^TTV, let 
Mm bend (Jer. 51^) ; ^t2n,Jlve (Ezek. 48^^) ; and D^, if (Ruth 3^'). 
Nedarim, 37 6-38 a. These are only specimens of a larger number 
of instances in these departments which are given in later times. 

(4) Extraordinary points were placed above letters or words 
to indicate that they were spurious. 

The Siphri, the earliest Midrash, or commentary on Numbers, 
gives ten of these,— Nu. 9^^ Ge. 16^ 18^ 19^^ 33^ 37^2 ; Nu. 21^", 
339^ 29^'; Deut. 29^8, — all in the Pentateuch. They were subse- 
quently increased to fifteen by adding four from the Prophets, — 
2Sam. 192^^; Is.44'^; Ezek. 412o, 46^% — and one from the Writings, 
Ps. 27^11 

(5) Letters were suspended in order to express doubt as to 
their propriety. 

3, in Jud. 18'^", changes Moses to Manasseh in order to remove 
reproach from the name of Moses. !?, in Ps. 80^"^, indicates a 
doubtful reading, as between '^^^^ the Nile, and '^'^'^, forest ; and 
a preference for the latter with possibly a reference to Rome 
instead of the original reference to Egypt. The other two 
instances (Job 38 ^^' ^^) indicate a preference for D^!?tl?n over D^tT'l, 
in order not to offend the dignity of David and of Nehemiah.^ 

(6) The letter Nun was inverted before and after a clause, 
in order to indicate bracketed material, which was, in the 
opinion of the scribes, out of place. ^ 

1 See Ginsburg, I.e., pp. 319 seg., who gives the original, a translation, and 
comments on the fifteen examples. 2 Sanhedrin, 10, 3 b. 

3 Numbers 1035,36. pg. 10723,24,25,26,27,28,29; go Siphri on Nu. lO^s, Talm. Sab- 
hath, 115 6-116 a ; Soplierim, VI. 1. 

N 



178 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

(T) There are also certain corrections or emendations of the 
scribes. 

D''*nS1D ppn. A list of eleven of these is given in the Me- 
chiltha on Ex. 15^ (of the second century) : Zee. 2^ ; Mai. 1^^ ; 1 Sam. 
313; Job 720 ; Hab. 1^^ Jer. 2"; Ps. 106^% Nu. 11^^'; 2 Sam. 20^; 
Ezek. 8^"; Nu. 12^^. These were subsequently increased to eigh- 
teen by seven additional ones: Ge. 18^2; 2 Sam. 16^2. ^ y^ ^^^^.^ 
2 Ch. 10i«; Hos. 4^; Job 32^; Lam. 3^^. 

ISTu. 11^^ was changed from ']n3?*1D, Thy evil, the evil sent by 
God upon Israel, to '^n^'lD, my evil, in order to avoid the refer- 
ence to God and a possible imputation of moral evil to Him. 

Hab. 1^ was changed from TT\l2ir\ ^7, Tliou diest not, to K7 
m^3, we shall not die, because it was supposed that the very 
thought of God as dying was unworthy of Him. A full discus- 
sion of all these passages is given by Ginsburg.^ 

(8) The scribes also strove to remove from the text indel- 
icate expressions, anthropomorphisms, and other statements 
unworthy of their religion. 

The Talmud ^ gives the rule : In every passage where the text 
has an indelicate expression a euphemism is to be substituted for 
it, as for instance, for Tu^W^, ravish, violate, outrage (Deut. 28^^; 
Is. 13^^ Jer. 32; Zech. 14^), ^2Mt!?^ to lie with, is to be substi- 
tuted ; for D^Ss^, posteriors (Deut. 28^'' ; 1 Sam. 5^, 6^) read 
D''*lintO, emerods; for D^iV^H, dung, excrements, or D^3V ^^H, doves' 
dung (2 K. 6^), read 0''^^% decayed leaves; for Dn\^nn or Dnnn, 
excrement (2 K. 18^'; Is. 36^') substitute Ti^X^, deposit; for QH^rtr, 
urine (2 K. 18^'; Is. 36^), read nT&>T\ ^flf^, water of their feet; for 
mi^nn^S, middens, privies (2 K. 10^), substitute m^^Stl^^, sewers, 
retreats.^ 

(9) They removed expressions which seemed blasphemous. 

Ginsburg'* gives as a specimen of this 2 Sam. 12^^, where it is 
said of David : '^ Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast greatly 
blasphemed Yahweh." The scribes have inserted " enemies," so 
as to make them, rather than David, guilty of the blasphemy. 
He also mentions Ps. 10^, where *]12, hless, has been inserted as a 
gloss to Vi^3, blaspheme, and calls attention to other substitutions 
of ^-IS for SSp. 

'^Introduction, pp. 347 seq. ^ See Ginsburg, I.e., p. 346. 

2 Megilla, 25 h ; Jerusalem Megilla IV. * i.e., pp. 363 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 179 

(10) The Soplierim also made divisions in the sacred text. 
The earliest of these were the sections called ParasMyoth. In 
the first century there were similar divisions, but the present 
ones belong to the Sopherim.i There are two kinds, the open 
and the closed, the one indicating a greater division than the 
other. 2 

The Sopherim also arranged the Pentateuch for liturgical 
purposes. The Palestinian Jews divided it into 154 sections, 
called Sedarim^ for a triennial course of Sabbath readings. 
The Babylonian Jews had a division of fifty-four Sedarim for 
an annual course of Sabbath readings.^ Besides tiiese there 
were verses called Pesukim, already mentioned in the Mishna.'* 

The Prophets and the Writings have also Parashiyoth and 
Sedarim. Some of these come from the most ancient times, 
others from the Sopherim. But it is probable that the present 
Sedarim date from the Massoretic period. There are, however, 
selections for Sabbath reading called Saphtaroth^ twenty-seven 
in the former Prophets, and fifty-two in the latter Prophets. 
Such selections were made in the first centurj^, but the selection 
then seems to have been made by the reader at the time.^ But 
they were fixed by the Sopherim, as they are referred to in the 
Mishna.^ 

There were, moreover, differences of reading which came 
down in the two great schools of the Sopherim, — the Palestinian 
and the Babylonian, — which are mentioned in the Talmud. 
These, and all other matters connected with the text, were 
more precisely indicated in the work of the Massorites. 

^ Megilla, IH., 5; Shahb., t 103 &; Menach., f. 30/; Hupfeld, Stud, und 
Erit., 1837, s. 837 Anm. 

2 There are 290 open Parashiyoth iii the Pentateuch and 379 closed Parash- 
iyoth. In some manuscripts and in printed texts these are indicated by S and D 
in the spaces. 

3 The numbers 54, 154, were for the extra month which was introduced every 
five or six years to make up for the inexactness of tlie ancient year. Accord- 
ing to Ginsburg (I.e., pp. 33 seq.) there are really 167 Sedarim in the Pentateuch. 

* Megilla, IV. 4. 

5 Lk. 416 ; Acts 1315, 27. 

6 But the order of the Talmud does not agTee with the order of the later manu- 
scripts, and there is a difference in usage between the German and the Spanish 
Jews. 



180 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

III. The Massoretic Text of the Old Testament 

The difference between the work of the Sopherim and of the 
jMassorites is thus stated by Ginsburg : ^ 

" Henceforth the Massorites became the authoritative custodians 
of the traditionally transmitted text. Their functions were entirely 
different from those of their predecessors, the Sopherim. The 
Sopherim, as we have seen, were the authorised revisers and 
redactors of the text according to certain principles, the Masso- 
rites were precluded from developing the principles and altering 
the text in harmony with these Canons. Their province was to 
safeguard the text delivered to them by ' building a hedge around 
it,' to protect it against alterations, or the adoption of any readings 
which still survived in manuscripts or were exhibited in the ancient 
Versions. For this reason, they marked in the margin of every 
page in the Codices every unique form, every peculiarity in the 
orthography, every variation in ordinary phraseologies, every 
deviation in dittographs, etc." 

The principal work of the Massorites was in fixing the tradi- 
tional pronunciation of the words and sentences of the Sacred 
^yritings and the traditional method of reading the sacred 
books in the synagogue. This was accomplished by tbe sys- 
tems of vowel points and accents which they added to the 
sacred unpointed text, and the diacritical signs whicli they 
established. The simplest, and probably the earliest, addition 
to the text was the point in the bosom of the letter, ^ which 
indicates sometimes that the letter is doubled ; ^ sometimes that 
it is unaspirated and hard ; ^ and sometimes that a quiescent 
letter has its full consonantal power ; ^ and the stroke above 
the letter indicating the soft or aspirated letter ^ and the qui- 
escence of the letter.' 

The Syriac language uses a point for the discrimination of 
the hard and soft letters, distinguishing by putting it above or 
below the letter. So also the point beneath a word indicates 
the simple form of noun or verb, the point above the less sim- 
ple form. The Syriac also uses two points to indicate the 



1 I.e., p. 421. 


s Mappiq, T^ = ah, not a. 


2 wn, a point. 


6 nsn, soft, 3 = bh. 


3 Dagesli forte, 3 = bb. 


' n = a. 


4 Dagesh lene, S = 6, and not bh. 





HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 181 

plural number. The Arabic uses the point to discriminate a 
larger number of letters than the Hebrew ; but for a sign of 
doubling a different sign, called Teshdid, and also a different 
sign for the Mappiq, called Hemza. 

The Hebrew vowel points, as they now exist, have a long 
historical development back of them. The simplest system of 
vowel points is the Arabic, Avhich distinguishes only the three 
simple vowels «, ^, u^ and the absence of a voAvel. 

The Syriac gives us a double system, the Greek and the 
Syrian proper, standing between the Arabic and the Hebrew. 
The Hebrew has also two systems, the ordinary system and the 
superlinear system, the latter commonly but incorrectly named 
the Babylonian. These go back on an earlier, simpler sys- 
tem, somewhat like the Arabic, which has been lost.^ The 
origin of the system of pointing the Shemitic languages was 
probably in the Syrian school at Edessa,^ and from thence it 
passed over from Syriac texts at first to Arabic texts and 
afterward to Hebrew texts. The movement began with dia- 
critical signs, such as we find in the Syriac, to distinguish 
certain letters and forms. This gave place to a system of 
vowel points. Among the Hebrews there was a gradual evo- 
lution of the present elaborate system. It did not reach its 
present condition until the seventh century, at Babylon, and 
the middle of the eighth century of our era, in Palestine.^ 

The accents went through a similar course of development. 
They serve for a guide in the cantilation of the synagogues, 
the division of the sentences, and the determination of the 
tone. These also were modelled after the musical notation of 
the Syrian Church.* 

They were not written in Hebrew manuscripts until the 
close of the seventh century.^ The earliest effort to divide 

1 Gesenius, Hehr. Gram., ed. Rodiger and Kautzsch, 26 Aufl. p. 31. Trans. 
Collins and Cowley, 1898, p. 33. 

2 Bacher, Hehr. Sprachivissenschaft, 1892, s. 6 ; Harris, Jewish Quarterly Be- 
view, 1889, p. 235. This is denied by Gwilliam in Studia Biblica, III. p. 64. 
He thinks that the Syrian Massora was derived from the Hebrews. 

3 Dillmann, Biheltext. A. T., in Herzog, Ency., II. pp. 394-396. 

^ Wickes, Treatise on the Accentuation of the Three So-called Poetic Books 
of the Old Testament, Oxford, 1881 ; G. F. Moore, Proc. Am. Oriental Society, 
1888, p. xxxvii. ^ AVickes, I.e., p. 8. 



182 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the sentences was doubtless the double point at the close of 
the verse, and the single point in the middle. This may have 
been made by the Sopherim. There must have been a long 
development before the present elaborate systems were devised. 
There are three systems of accents, the so-called Babylonian, 
the Palestinian prose system, and the Palestinian poetic system. ^ 
The poetic system is used only in the Psalter, Proverbs, and 
Job. The Massorites strove to distinguish between the ordi- 
nary cantilation of the Law and the Prophets, and a more melo- 
dious rendering for the three great poetical books, just as the 
Christian Church has one rhythmical form for the Gospels and 
Epistles, and another for the chanting of the Psalms. It is 
probable that the Massorites were influenced by Christian 
usage to make the service of the synagogue more ornate and 
worthy of their religion. 

The work of the Massorites was extended to the use of a 
number of signs to indicate peculiarities in the text. A little 
circle above the letter was used to indicate the extraordinary 
forms of letters,^ the extraordinary points,^ the Readings.* A 
little star was used to indicate errors that they would not cor- 
rect.^ On the margins and at the end of the manuscripts the 
Massorites noted the emendations of the scribes, the removal of 
the conjunction and^ the differences of readings between the 
Babylonian and Palestinian authorities, and also between the 
principal Western authorities. They numbered the sections, 
verses, words, and letters of the Sacred Writings, and even 
counted the number of times certain words were used. All of 
this work is of great value for the history of the Text. 

The Massorites did not hesitate to change the order of the 

1 Wickes, Treatise on the Accentuation of the Twenty-one So-called Prose 
Books of the Old Testament, Oxford, 1887, pp. 142 seq., shows that the so- 
called Babylonian systems of vowel points and accents is Babylonian only in 
the sense that they are found in Babylonian manuscripts ; and he claims that 
these systems were later modifications of the earlier system, which is now, and 
has always been, the only official one for the Babylonian as well as for the 
Palestinian Jews. 

2 Final Mem in middle of word. Is. 9^ ; large Beth at the beginning of Gene- 
sis ; large Waio in Lev. 11*2; ijttle Aleph, Lev. 1^ ; suspended letters, Jer. 18^0, 
Ps. 8014. 8 See p. 177. * See p. 177. 

^ Aleph with Ddgesh, Gen. 43^6 j neglect of rules of pause, Gen. 11^, 27^. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 183 

sacred books. They have transmitted the Prophets in a dif- 
ferent order from that given in the Talmud. They arranged 
the five Rolls for use at the five great feasts of Judaism, and 
also rearranged the Writings. 

The work of the western Massorites reached its culmination 
in the tenth century, in the text of Ben Asher, and the work 
of the Orientals about the same time in the text of Ben 
Naphtali. The text of Ben Asher became the standard text 
upon which all subsequent manuscripts in the West and all 
printed editions have been based. ^ 

IV. Hebrew Manuscripts of the Old Testament 

The Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament are divided 
into three classes : the Palestinian, the Babylonian, and the 
Samaritan. 

1. The Palestinian Manuscripts 

The most of the manuscripts that have been preserved are of 
this class. Here we have to distinguish between synagogue 
rolls and private manuscripts. The former were prepared with 
so much care that mistakes became difficult. The Mishna^ 
prescribes the rules for their preparation with the greatest pre- 
cision. Hence it is that in manuscripts of the Law thus far 
collated, of both the Babylonian and the Palestinian groups, 
the differences in the consonantal text are few and unimpor- 
tant. The synagogue rolls, however, present only the Law, 
the pericopes of the Prophets,^ and the five Rolls ; * and these 
are without the Massoretic apparatus and are as a rule not 
ancient. They are written on rolls of parchment and of 
leather. The private manuscripts, written also on paper alone, 
contain the Massoretic apparatus. None of these reach back 
into the pre-Massoretic period. None of those collated by 
Kennicott and De Rossi reach back of the eleventh century.^ 

1 Bacher, Hehr. Sprachwissenschaft, s. 10. ^ Sopherim, YI. 4. 

3 The Haptaroth, see p. 179. * Ruth, Lam., Esther, Eccl., Song of Songs. 

5 Kennicott, Vet. Test. Hehr., 2 vols., Oxford, 1776, 1780, compares 615 
manuscripts, 52 editions and Talmud ; De Rossi, VaricB lection. Vet. Testamenti, 
4 vols., Parma, 1784-1788, compares 731 manuscripts, 300 editions and the 
ancient versions. 



184 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Several manuscripts at Aleppo, Cairo, in the British Museum, 
and in the library of the University of Cambridge, are in dis- 
pute. Some claim that they belong to the ninth century, but 
the general opinion is that they are not earlier than the eleventh 
century.^ 

There are a number of lost manuscripts of the Palestinian 
school that are renowned. 

(a) The Codex Mugar is often cited in the earliest exist- 
ing Hebrew manuscripts, and is regarded by Ginsburg as the 
oldest of those cited. ^ 

(5) The Codex Hillel, not earlier than the seventh century 
A.D., was consulted by Jacob ben Eleazar in the twelfth 
century. 2 

(c) The Codex Ben Asher is of the first half of the tenth 
century. The entire Massoretic text of the Occidental Jews 
rests upon this. This manuscript was at first at Jerusalem; 
afterwards it was removed to Egypt. 

(d) The Codex Sanbuki probably belonged to a Hungarian 
family of that name. It is of unknown date. It is cited 
occasionally on the margin of manuscripts. 

(e) The Massora also refers to a Jericho codex of the Law, 
and a Sinai codex of the Prophets.* 

1 A codex ascribed to Aaron ben Aslier, or Ben Asher the Younger, and pre- 
served in Aleppo, is thought by many to be very ancient. Its antiquity and 
genuineness is defended by Ginsburg (^Introduction^ pp. 242 seq.) as of the date 
earlier than 980, a copy of which, of about 1009 a.d., being now in the Imperial 
Public Library at St. Petersburg. So great an antiquity is denied by Wickes 
(I.e., 1887, pp. vii-ix) and Lagarde (iY. G. G. W., 1890, 16). Strack (Semitic 
Studies in Memory of A. Kohut, p. 663) withholds his decision until the manu- 
script can be more carefully examined. Schiller-Szinessy claims that a Hebrew 
manuscript numbered No. 12, at the University of Cambridge, England, was of 
the date of 856, but Neubauer (Academy, 1887, p. 321, Studia Bihlica, III. pp. 28 
seq.) has disproved it. Ginsburg (I.e., pp. 241 seq.) claims that the codex of Ben 
Asher the Elder, in the synagogue of the Karaite Jews at Cairo, is genuine and of 
the date of 890-895, and that a copy of it was purchased in the year 1530 and is 
in the synagogue at Cracow. This is disputed by S. Baer, Wickes, and Neubauer 
(see Stud. Bibl., III. pp. 25 seq.); but Herman Strack (Semitic Studies in Mem- 
ory of A. Kohut, s. 563) thinks that their reasons are insufficient. Ginsburg (I.e., 
pp. 469 seq. ) describes a manuscript 4445 of the British Museum Library, which 
he claims to be of the date of 820-850 a.d. 

2 See Ginsburg, I.e., pp. 429 seq. 

3 So David Kimchi testifies (3Iichlol, fol. 78 h, col. 2). 
* Ginsburg, I.e., pp. 434 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 185 

2. The Babylonian Manuscripts 

The earliest known to scholars is the St. Petersburg codex 
of the Prophets,^ 916 a.d. The oldest of the entire Bible is 
a codex at St. Petersburg supposed to be of 1009 a.d. 2 A 
lost manuscript of the Babylonian school is the Codex Ben 
Naphtali, which is referred to in the Massora as a standard 
authority, of the first half of the tenth century a.d. Many 
of its readings are also preserved by Kimchi in his grammar 
and lexicon. No copy of this manuscript is known to exist. 

3. The Samaritan Codex 

An ancient manuscript of this codex is preserved in the 
Samaritan synagogue at Nablous, in Samaria. It is claimed by 
the Samaritans that it has been handed down from Abisha, the 
great-grandson of Aaron, whose name is inscribed upon it. It 
is mentioned by Cyril of Alexandria, Eusebius, Jerome, and 
Procopius of Gaza among the Fathers, but was lost sight of 
subsequently until 1616 a.d., when Pietro della Valle pro- 
cured a copy of it at Damascus. It was published in the Paris 
Polyglot of 1645 and in the London Polyglot of 1657. At 
once a hot dispute arose as to its value, which continued for 
two centuries, Morinus, Houbigant, and Hassencamp exalting 
it above the Massoretic text; Hottinger, J. D. Michaelis, and 
Tychsen advocating the superiority of the latter. Gesenius^ 
was the first to thoroughly compare the texts. His view was 
that while the text was an inde]3endent one in its origin, it has 
yet been improved by the Samaritans in order to avoid ob- 
scurities, and in the interests of their own religion, at times 
betraying ignorance of Hebrew grammar and syntax. It has 
many features of resemblance to the Septuagint Version. Ge- 
senius calculates them at more than one thousand. These facts 

1 Published by Herman Strack in photo-lithograph, Prophetarum posterior urn 
Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus, St. Petersburg, 1876. 

2 Wickes gives reasons for the opinion that this manuscript is of much later 
date (Accents, IX.). But Harkavy and Strack, 263-274, Katalog. d. Hehr. 
Bihelhandschriften, in St. Petersburg, 1875, and Baer and Strack, DiMuke ha- 
teamim, XXIV. seg., accept the date. Ginsburg also thinks that this codex does 
not really represent the Babylonian text, although it has the so-called Baby- 
lonian system of vowel points and accents {I.e., pp. 215 seq.). 

2 De Pentateuci Samaritani Oriqine, 1815. 



186 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

attracted the attention of scholars, so that on the one side 
Hottinger, Hassencamp, Eichhorn, and Kohn contended that 
the Septuagint was translated from the Samaritan text, and on 
the other side Grotius, Usher, and others urged that the Samar- 
itan was made from the Septuagint. Both these views have 
been shown to. be impossible and have been abandoned by 
recent scholars, who give the text an independent authority. 
It was, then, either with the Septuagint derived from a com- 
mon older manuscript of Jerusalem, as Gesenius, Nutt, and 
others ; or, as the differences between them are quite numerous, 
they are based on independent original manuscripts, the origi- 
nal of the Samaritan text having been brought from Jerusalem 
by Manasseh when he introduced the Samaritan schism. The 
text was published again by Blayney, Oxford, 1790, in square 
characters. The variations from the Massoretic text have been 
noted by Petermann.^ 

The influence of Gesenius led many of the older scholars to 
too unfavourable views of this text. Recent scholars show an 
increasing confidence in its readings. 

V. Printed Texts of the Hebrew Bible 

1. The earliest printed editions of the Hebrew text were the 
Psalter at Bologna, 1477, and the Law, 1482. The whole Bible 
was first printed at Soncino, Lombardy, in 1488 ; then at Naples, 
1491-1493. Another edition was printed at Brescia in 1494. 
This was used by Luther in making his version. The same 
text is used in Bomberg's first Rabbinical Bible, 1516-1517, 
edited by Felix Pratensis, and in his manual editions, 1517 seq. ; 
and also by Stephens, 1539 8eq.^ and Sebastian Munster. 

2. The second independent text was issued in the Complu- 
tensian Polyglot, 1514-1517, of Cardinal Ximenes, with vowel 
points but without accents. 

3. The third independent text was edited bj^ Jacob ben 
Chayim in the second Rabbinical Bible of Bomberg, 1524-1525. 
This was carefully revised after the Massora. 

1 Versuch einer hebraisclien Formenlehre nach der Ausspraclte der heutigen 
JSamaritaner, Leipzig, 1868. 



HISTORY 0:F the TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE 187 

All the printed texts from that time until recent times are 
mixtures of these three texts. 

(a) The Antwerp Polyglot, 1569-1572, under the manage- 
ment of Arias Mont anus. 

(5) The manual editions of Hutter, 1587 seq. 

(c) Buxtorf's Rabbinical Bible, 1618-1619, and his manual 
editions. 

(c?) The Paris Polyglot, 1629-1645. 

(e) The London Polyglot, 1654-1657. 

(/) A number of manual editions with mixed texts follow : 
Leusden, 1667 ; Jablonski, 1699 ; Baer, 1701 ; Michaelis, 1720 ; 
Van der Hooght, 1705 ; Opitius, 1709 ; Hahn, 1831 ; Theile, 
1849. 

4. Baer and Delitzsch undertook a fourth independent text 
by the use of the entire Massoretic apparatus accessible. The 
several books of the Hebrew text were published apart, 1869- 
1895, when Baer and Delitzsch having both died, their work 
remained unfinished. 

5. A fifth independent text has just been published by Gins- 
burg, 1894, which will doubtless for some time be the standard 
edition of the Massoretic text. It is essentially "based upon 
the first edition of Jacob ben Chajim's Massoretic recension. "^ 

1 Ginsburg, Introduction^ Preface. 



CHAPTER YIII 

HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 

The Jews in Egypt during the Persian supremacy doubtless 
used the Egyptian dialect of the Aramaic, which has been pre- 
served to us in certain inscriptions. But soon after the Greek 
conquest of Egypt, they changed their language to an Egyptian 
dialect of the Greek. The Jews flourished in Egypt, especially 
in the new city of Alexandria, and became rich and powerful 
so that they built many fine synagogues. They soon felt the 
need in their worship of a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures 
into the tongue of the people. This began, as in Palestine, by 
oral translations in the synagogue, but it was not long before 
it became more important than in Palestine to commit these 
translations to writing. Accordingly a Greek translation of 
the Law was first made, then of the Prophets and the Psalms. 
The other Writings were not used in the synagogue, and there- 
fore they were only translated for private reading at a later 
date. The legend that the Greek Old Testament was trans- 
lated all at once by seventy select men, who used a manu- 
script sent to them from Jerusalem, has no historic basis. ^ 

I. The Greek Septuagint 

The Greek translation of the Pentateuch was probably made 
early in the third century B.C., the Prophets and the most of 
the Writings were translated before the middle of the second 
century, but the whole of them and the Apocrypha not until 
the first century. 2 It is quite possible that the Pentateuch 

1 See pp. 124 seq. 

2 Gratz (Gesch. Juden., III. pp. 428 seq.) holds that the translation was not 
made under Ftolemaeus Philadelphus at the beginning of the third century b.c, 
but under Ptolemseus Philometer, middle of the second century b.c, and that 

188 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 189 

was translated by Palestinian Jews under royal sanction ^ ac- 
cording to the tradition ; but the translators of the Prophets 
and the Writings must have been Egyptian Jews. The books 
of Samuel and Jeremiah differ in the Greek so very greatly 
from the Hebrew traditional text that we must conclude that 
they were translated from manuscripts which were at an early 
date independent of Palestinian manuscripts ; especially as 
they are free from a considerable number of Midrashim, which 
must have made their way into the Hebrew text after the 
Egyptian manuscripts were written, and at a time when 
scribes felt at liberty to make such considerable additions to 
the text. Baumgartner has shown that the book of Proverbs 
was translated from a Hebrew text, written in the Egyptian 
Aramaic character, and that it shows traces also of having been 
written in older Aramaic characters after it had been translit- 
erated from the ancient Hebrew characters.^ Hollenberg 
makes the same statement for the book of Joshua ^ and Vollers 
for the twelve minor prophets.* Workman makes a similar 
statement as to Jeremiah, but does not give sufficient evidence 
of it.5 

The book of Sirach was translated into Greek about 130 
B.C., and added to the sacred books of the Egyptian Canon ; 
and others of the apocryj)hal books and writings were added, 

the Jewish peripatetic Aristobulus played the chief part in its accomplishment ; 
but most scholars agree with Wellhausen that the translation of the Pentateuch 
was made under Ptolemseus Philadelphus. That is all the letter of Aristeas 
really refers to. It was quite natural that later tradition should extend it to the 
whole Old Testament. Besides, the Prologue of the Greek Ecclesiasticus knows, 
about 130 B.C., of a Greek translation of the Law, the Prophets, and other books. 

1 Buhl (Lc, s. 124) calls attention to the fact that the three accounts of the 
translation of the Law in the letter of Aristeas, the addition to Esther, and the 
book of Sirach, all agree in representing the translators as being Palestinian, 
and remarks that the Palestinian Jews really, in most cases, understood Greek 
better than the Egyptian Jews understood Hebrew, and that the translators 
would naturally be Palestinian Jews who had recently migrated to Egypt. 

Freudenthal (Hellenistische Studien, 1875, s. 185) has shown that Samuel, 
Kings, Chronicles, Job, and probably Joshua, had been translated by the middle 
of the second century. Strack (I.e., s. 192) agrees to it. 

2 JEtude critique sur Vetat du texte du livre des Proverbes, 1890, pp. 247 seq. 

3 Der Charakter d. Alexand. Uebersetzung d. Buches Josua, 1876, s. 12. 
* Z. A. T. W., 1883, s. 231. 

5 The Text of Jeremiah, 1889, pp. 233 seq. 



190 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 

until by the close of the first century B.C. the entire Greek Old 
Testament had been completed in the Greek language. This 
was the Bible of the early Christians, not only in Alexandria, 
but all over the Roman world. The writers of the epistles of 
the New Testament quote from it, and they are followed by 
all the sub-apostolic Fathers and Christian writers of the earlier 
Christian centuries. 

II. The Greek New Testament 

In the second Christian century the Greek New Testament 
was added to the Old Testament. The most of the New Tes- 
tament was originally written in Greek for Greek readers. 
The Logia of Matthew was written in Hebrew, in order that it 
might be added to the Holy Scripture for Jewish Christians. 
The earlier apocalypses of the book of Revelation were also 
written in Hebrew. ^ The Epistle of James was probably 
written in Hebrew also, as well as the Canticles of the early 
chapters of Luke.^ But these were all translated into Greek, 
or taken up into larger Greek writings, and their Hebrew 
originals perished. Accordingly the New Testament became 
in fact a Greek New Testament. 

All of the writings of the Canon of the New Testament were 
in circulation early in the second century ; but they were not 
collected into a Canon before the latter part of the second 
century. They were in private manuscripts, and for the most 
part at least written on papyrus.^ 

" No autograph of any book of the New Testament is known or 
believed to be still in existence. The originals must have been 
early lost, for they are mentioned by no ecclesiastical writer, 
although there were many motives for appealing to them, had 
they been forthcoming, in the second and third centuries." . . . 

" We know little about the external features of the MSS. of the 
ages of persecution: but what little we do know suggests that 
they were usually small, containing only single books or groups of 
books, and not seldom, there is reason to suspect, of compara- 
tively coarse material." * 

1 See Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles^ p. 301. 

2 See Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, p. 42. ^ gee pp. 133 seq. 

* Westcott and Hort, New Testament in Greek, Introduction, pp. 4, 9-10. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 191 

The separate writings were often copied before they were 
gathered into the groups which constitute the present Canon, 
and scattered widely over the world. But in the times of per- 
secution large numbers of them were destroyed, especially dur- 
ing the persecution of Diocletian. 

The roll of papyrus was the book of the early Christians. 
For public reading in the churches, rolls of skin were probably 
used among the Christians, as among the Jews, whenever the 
community was able to bear the expense. But the entire 
library of Origen and Pamphilus at Csesarea consisted of papy- 
rus rolls. ^ 

The sacred books of the Old and New Testaments consti- 
tuted quite a library of these rolls ; the rolls ordinarily con- 
tained only a single writing. Even the Gospels appear in 
several different orders on the monuments of the fourth and 
fifth centuries, showing that each was usually on a separate 
roll. No monumental evidence of the existence of a codex of 
parchment appears before the close of the third century ; no 
literary evidence before the middle of the third century. 
These codices were at first very expensive, and so the papyrus 
rolls continued in private use deep into the fifth century. ^ 

III. Other Greek Versions 

The use of the Greek version of the Old Testament by the 
Christians and its many differences from the Hebrew official 
text as established by the Sopherim of the school of Rabbi 
Akiba, excited the hostility of the Jewish scribes, and every 
effort was made to discredit it. In the first half of the second 
century A.D. a Greek version was made by Aquila, a pupil of 
Rabbi Akiba, on the basis of the official Hebrew text.^ It 
is extremely literal and endeavours conscientiously to follow 
the official text.^ 

1 Birt, Das antike Buchwesen, 1882, s. 109. 

2 Schultze, Bolle und Codex, in Greifswalder Studien, 1895, s. 150 seq. 
^ Megilla, I. 9 ; Qidduschin, I. 1. 

* The sign of the definite accusative TK is translated by <T}jy, the local n by 84, 
*lttKb by to; \4y€Lv. These are striking examples of an extreme literalism which 
goes so far as to impair the real meaning of the passage. This Aquila is men- 
tioned by Irenseus, Adv. Hceres, III. 24 ; Eusebius, Hist. eccL, V. 8, 10 ; Jerome 



192 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The greater part of this version has been lost, only frag- 
ments having been preserved. At the same time the influence 
of Aquila may be seen in the revision of the Septuagint text 
of Ezekiel and Ecclesiastes, into which elements from Aquila 
have been taken up.^ Another Greek version was made about 
the same time by Theodotion. He revised the Septuagint to 
make it conform to the official text.^ His translation has only 
been preserved in fragments, apart from the book of Daniel, 
which supplanted the Septuagint Version of Daniel in the 
usage of the Church, and other elements which have been 
taken up into the Greek Bibles. Symmachus undertook about 
the same time ^ to make a better Greek version of the Old Testa- 
ment from a Christian point of view* and in more elegant Greek. 
There are fragments of three other independent Greek ver- 
sions of the old Testament which have been preserved, known 
as Quinta, Sexta, and Septima, of unknown origin.^ These are 
chiefly of the poetical books. All these make it evident that 
there was a wide-spread dissatisfaction with the Septuagint 
at the close of the second and the beginning of the third cen- 
tury, not only on the part of the Jews but also of the Chris- 
tians. It is probable that the zealous polemic of the Jewish 
scribes on the basis of the official Hebrew text brought about 
this serious situation. 

IV. The Official Texts of the Greek Bible 

Origen during his abode at Csesarea (232-254 a.d.) made a 
gigantic effort to remove this dissatisfaction and establish a 

on Is. 814, jEpist. 57 ad Pammachmm, c. 11 ; Origen, ad Afric (I. 14, Delarue). 
Cf. Schtirer, Gesch. d. Jud., II. 311. Cornill (E.zek., s. 64, 104) mentions Codex 
62 of Holmes, which shows the influence of Aquila. The Septuagint of Kohe- 
leth and the Song of Songs also show his influence, not only in the Greek, but 
also in the Syriac translation. See Buhl, ?.c., s. 155. 

1 Cornill, Ezekiel, s. 104 seq. ; Dillmann, Ueher d. Griech. Uehersetzung der 
Koheleth, in Sitzungsbericlite d. Konig. Preus. Akad. d. Wiss., 1892. 

2 Theodotion is mentioned by Ireneeus (Adv. Hcer. ) as a proselyte of Ephesus. 
Jerome calls him an Ebionite (Comm., Hab. S^^-i^, Cf. Prcef. Gomm. in Dan.). 

3 He is usually assigned to the beginning of the third century. But Epipha- 
nius puts him in the time of Marcus Aurelius. Mercati has recently come to the 
same conclusion (see Strack, Z.c, s. 201). 

* Eusebius (H. E., VI. 17) and Jerome {I.e.) both call him an Ebionite. 
5 Eusebius. I.e.. VI. 16. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 193 

reliable Greek text of the Old Testament. He gathered in his 
Hexapla the Hebrew text, the Hebrew text transliterated into 
Greek characters, the three versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and 
Symmachus, and a revised Septuagint text.^ 

Where the Septuagint was missing he used Theodotion with 
an asterisk. There can be little doubt that this revision of the 
text of the Old Testament was accompanied by a similar move- 
ment for the collection of the New Testament writings and a 
revision of their text. But there is no evidence that Origen 
had a hand in it.^ 

The text of the Septuagint fixed by Origen in the Hexapla 
was issued by Eusebius and Pamphilus at Ceesarea, and proba- 
bly also a revision of the Greek New Testament was made 
at about the same time under similar influences, and these 
became the official Greek Bible for the Church of Palestine. 
Soon afterwards, Hesychius revised the text of the entire Bible 
in Alexandria, and it became the official text of the Church of 
Egypt. About the same time Lucian the Martyr (311 + ) 
made another independent revision of the entire Greek Bible 
at Antioch. Thus at the beginning of the fourth century there 
were three rival texts of the Greek Bible in use. 

Jerome refers to the work of Lucian and Hesychius in his 
Prcef. in Paralip., thus, "Alexandria et ^gyptus in Septuaginta 
suis Hesychiuni laudat auctorem, Constantinopolis usque Antio- 
chiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat." Cf. also his Epist. 
106, ad Sunniam et Fretelam, and Prcef. in Evang., " I pass over 
those manuscripts which are associated with the names of Lucian 
and Hesychius, and the authority of which is perversely main- 

1 The Greek fragments of the Hexapla were gathered by Field (Origenis 
Hexaplorum qucB snpersunt, 2 vols.), Oxford, 1867-1875. A Syriac translation 
of the Septuagint text of the Hexapla was made by Paul of Telia in 616 a.d. 
A manuscript of this translation of the eighth century was discovered in the 
Ambrosian Library of Milan and issued by Ceriani in 1874. Still more recently 
a fragment of the entire Hexapla of a number of the Psalms has been discovered 
in the Ambrosian Library by Giov. Mercati, who has given a brief account of it 
in 1896, and who will soon publish it. It embraces Ps. 45 and parts of 17, 27-31, 
34, 35, 48, 88 (of the numbers of the Septuagint). Cf. Giov. Mercati, Un 
Palimpsesto Ambrosiano dei Salmi Usapli, Turin, 1898. 

2 See Holtzmann, Einleitung^ s. 47, who quotes from Origen: "In exempla- 
ribus autem Novi Testamenti hoc ipsum posse facere sine periculo non putavi " 
(in Mt. XV. 14). See, however, Jerome on Mt. 2438 and Gal. 3^. 



194 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

tained by a handful of disputatious x^ersons. It is obvious that 
these writers could not amend anything in the Old Testament 
after the labours of the Seventy; and it was useless to correct 
the New, for versions of Scripture which already exist in the 
languages of many nations show that their additions are false." ^ 
Cf. with reference to Hesychins further Jerome's Comm. on 
Is. 5S'\ Nestle, in Z. D. M. G., XXXII. s. 481 seq., quotes from 
a scholion of Jacob of Edessa, the statement that Lucian when 
he saw ^i*1K in the text and Kvpio^ on the margin he combined 
the two, 'ASoovat KvpLo<;. A similar conflation is indeed found in 
the earliest Hebrew text of the Old Testament in the phrase 
nirr^^n^ (see Comill, Ezeldel, pp. 172 seq.). Nestle {Marginalien, 
Tubingen, 1893, s. 45) suggested that Lucian had used the Peshitto 
version. This was confirmed by Stockmayer in his investigation 
of the books of Samuel, and is agreed to by Strack (I.e., s. 194). 
Field (Hexapla, LXXXVIII.) calls attention to the fact that the 
formula HIH^ ^^1^, so common in Ezekiel, is given by JSd. Rom. 
Kvpios, in Comp. Aid. Codd., III., XII., 26, 42, 49, etc., Kvpio^ Kvpio? ; 
but in Codd., 22, 36, 48, etc., dSoomt Kvpio?. 

When Christianity ascended the throne of the Caesars great 
efforts were made for the transcribing and distribution of manu- 
scripts to supply the place of those that had been destroyed in 
the last persecution. Finally the Emperor Constantine, about 
332 A.D., ordered Eusebius to prepare " fift}^ copies of the 
Sacred Scriptures ... to be written on prepared parchment 
in a legible manner, and in a convenient, portable form, by 
professional transcribers thoroughly practised in their art." 
These were " magnificent and elaborately bound volumes of a 
threefold and fourfold form."^ None of these have been pre- 
served, but we may justly suppose that they were at least as 
large and stately as the Uncial codices of the fourth century 
from other cities, which have been preserved. These codices 
doubtless tended to establish official texts for a large part of the 
eastern Roman Empire, and it may be that the conflate Syriac 
text, which became the dominant text from the fourth century 
onward, dates from these codices. 

Many ancient versions were made from the Greek Bible. The 

1 Mcene and Post-Mcene Fathers, 2d series, Vol. VI., St. Jerome, p. 488. 

2 Eusebius, Vit. Constan., IV. 36-37 ; Richardson's edition, Mcene and Post- 
Mcene Fathers, 2d series. Vol. I., 1890, p. 549. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 195 

early Latin versions of North Africa and North Italy ; the 
Egyptian versions, the Memphitic and Thebaic, were made 
in the second century; the Gothic in the fourth century; the 
Ethiopic in the fourth or fifth centuries, and the Armenian in 
the fifth century. These represent several stages in the de- 
velopment of the text of the Greek Bible. 

y. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible 

The earlier manuscripts of the Greek Bible are called Uncials, 
or Majuscules, because they are written in capital letters with- 
out accents ; the later are called Minuscules, because they are 
written in a smaller hand. A careful study of the manu- 
scripts of the Greek Bible on the genealogical principle en- 
ables scholars to arrange them in the following groups : 

VI. The So-called Neutral Text 

The earliest uncial manuscript of the Greek Bible is the Vati- 
can codex, of the fourth Christian century, catalogued as B. 

"Written in an uncial hand of the fourth century on leaves of 
the finest vellum made up in quires of five ; the lines, which are 
of sixteen to eighteen letters, being arranged in three columns con- 
taining forty-two lines each, excepting the poetical books, where 
the lines being stichometrical, the columns are only two. There 
are no initial letters, although the first letter of a section occa- 
sionally projects into the margin ; no breathings or accents occur 
prima manu, the punctuation if by the first hand is rare and sim- 
ple. Of the 759 leaves which compose the present quarto volume, 
617 belong to the Old Testament. The first twenty leaves of the 
original codex have been torn away, and there are lacunm also at 
f. 178 (part of a leaf) and at f. 348 (ten leaves of the original 
missing) ; these gaps involve the loss of Gen. 1^-46^^, 2 K. 2^"^' ^°"^^, 
Ps. 105-^-137^ ; the missing passages in Genesis and Psalms have 
been supplied by a recent hand. The Prayer of Manasses and 
the Books of the Maccabees were never included in this codex. 
The other books are in the following order : Genesis to 2 Chron., 
Esdras 1, 2, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, Wis- 
dom of Solomon, Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, Esther, Judith, 
Tobit, Hosea, and the other Minor Prophets to Malachi, Isaiah, 



196 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Jeremiali, Baruch, Lamentations, and epistle of Jeremiah, Eze- 
kiel, Daniel (the version ascribed to Theodotion)." ^ 

It seems best to use Swete's descriptions sg far as they go, for 
this and the other great codices, because they are concise, accurate, 
and technical ; and it is better for scholars to rest upon a common 
ground in such technical matters. He does not specify the New 
Testament part of the codices ; and these I must add. Codex B 
has all the New Testament except Heb. 9^"'-13^, the Pastorals, 
Philemon, and the Apocalypse. 

The Codex Yaticanus represents a text earlier than any of 
the revisions of the third century, and it belongs to a family 
which was used by Origen when he made his Hexapla.^ It gives 
what Westcott and Hort term the Neutral Text, that is, a text 
which is free from the corruptions which came in in all the sub- 
sequent revisions, although it still has early corruptions of its 
own.^ This text is now accessible to scholars in the facsimile 
Roman edition, and also in a convenient and reliable form in 
Swete's edition of the Septuagint, published by the University 
Press of Cambridge, England, which follows the Vatican codex, 
and only uses the Alexandrian and Sinaitic where the Vatican 
text is missing. 

The next earliest manuscript is the Sinaitic, discovered by 
Constantinus Tischendorf in 1844-1859.* It also is an Uncial 
of the fourth century. 

" Written in an uncial hand, ascribed to the middle of the fourth 
century, and in lines which, when complete, contain from twelve 
to fourteen letters, and which are arranged in four columns on 
unusually large leaves of a very fine vellum, made from the skin 
of the ass or of the antelope. The leaves are gathered into quires 
of four, excepting two which contain five. There are no breath- 
ings or accents ; a simple point is occasionally used. In the New 
Testament the MS. is complete ; of the Old Testament the follow- 
ing portions remain : fragments of Gen. 23, 24, and of Numbers 
5, 6, 7, 1 Chron. 9^^-19^^ 2 Esdras 9, to end, Nehemiah, Esther, 
Tobit, Judith, 1 Mace, 4 Mace, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lam. 1^-2^, Joel, 
Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zecha- 
riah, Malachi, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, 

1 Swete, Old Testament in Greek, Vol, I. p. xvii. 

2 Strack, Einleitung. s. 194 ; Silberstein. Z. A. T. IF., 1893, s. 14. 

3 See Westcott and Hort, New Testament in Greek, Introduction, p. 150. 
* Gregory, Prolegomena, pp. 345 seq. 



HISTORY OE THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 197 

Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of tlie Son of Sirach, Job." ^ This 
codex not only contains the whole of the present Canon of the 
New Testament, but also the Epistle of Barnabas and fragments 
of the Shepherd of Hermas.^ 

This manuscript, usually known as i<, but also by others as 
S, is the nearest in text to the Vatican Codex B; but it con- 
tains readings, especially in John, Luke, and the Apocalypse, 
of the two distinct types which are known as Western and 
Alexandrian readings.^ 

The differences between these two great Uncials of the 
fourth century are such as to imply several stages of trans- 
mission between them and the time when they departed from a 
common parent. German scholars, after Tischendorf, value i< 
more highly than British scholars do. The parent manuscript 
is placed by Hort not later than the early part of the second 
Christian century.* This parent must have been therefore a 
collection of rolls, a little library of the different writings. 

VII. The Egyptian Text 

The third great Uncial manuscript is the Alexandrian A, 
of the British Museum, dating from the fifth century. 

" Written in an uncial hand of the middle of the fifth century, 
on vellum of fine texture originally arranged in quires of eight 
leaves, occasionally (but chiefly at the end of a Book) of less than 
eight ; three or four and twenty letters go to a line ; fifty or fifty- 
one lines usually compose a column, and there are two columns 
on a page. Large initial letters, standing in the margin, announce 
the commencement of a paragraph or section, excepting in Vol. 
III., which appears to be the work of another scribe. There are 
no breathings or accents added by the first hand ; the punctuation, 
more frequent than in B, is still confined to a single point. The 
three volumes, which contain the Old Testament, now consist of 
630 leaves. Of these volumes only nine leaves are lost and five 
mutilated. The portions of the Septuagint, which are thus defi- 
cient in A, contained Gen. W"-'', 151-16-19^ 1Q^9. i k. 1219-14^; 

1 Swete, Old Testament in Greek, p. xx. 

2 Eor a full description of this codex and a history of its discovery by Tisch- 
endorf, see Gregory, Prolegomena, pp. 345 seq. 

3 Gregory, I.e., p. 346. 

^ New Testament in Greek, Introduction, pp. 222 seq. 



198 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

written in uncial letters somewhat later than the body of the MS. 
The first volume contains the Octateuch with Kings and Chronicles 
(ofxov ^t/3A6a 9). The books of Chronicles are followed (Vol. 11.) by 
the Prophets (Trpof^-qrai ts) Minor and Major, Jeremiah, including 
Baruch, Lamentations and the Epistle ; Daniel (Theodotion's ver- 
sion) is succeeded by Esther, Tobit, Judith, Esdras 1, 2, and the 
four books of Maccabees. The third volume contains the Psalter, 
with Ps. CLI., and the Canticles, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the 
Song of Solomon, the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of the 
Son of Sirach. The table shews that the Psalms of Solomon once 
occupied a jplace at the end of the fourth volume which contains 
the New Testament." ^ This codex contains all of the present 
Canon of the New Testament except Mt. 1^-25^; John 6^-8^'; 
2 Cor. 4^^-12''. It also has the two epistles of Clement except 

]_58-63 213-20 2 

This manuscript was in the possession of the Patriarch of 
Alexandria for many centuries before it was presented to 
Charles I. of England in 1628. Swete says : ^ 

" It seems probable that A, which, as far back as the furthest 
period to which we can trace its history, was preserved in Egypt, 
had been originally written there ; and, as Mr. E. M. Thompson 
has pointed out, the occurrence of Egyptian forms of the Greek 
letters in the superscriptions and colophons of the books proves 
that ^ the MS., if not absolutely written in Egypt, must have been 
immediately afterwards removed thither.' '' 

To the same family belongs the Codex Ephraem C, also of 
the fifth century, now in the National Library at Paris. It 
is a bundle of fragments, preserving three-fifths of the whole 
original manuscript in the uncial character. But it is a 
palimpsest; that is, the original letters have faded or been 
washed out, and the manuscript has been written over by selec- 
tions from Ephraem the Syrian.* 

The Codex Vaticanus 452 of the Prophets,^ of the eleventh 
century, was also originally in the possession of the Patriarch 
of Alexandria, and presents a text of the same general char- 

1 Swete, Z.c, p. xxii. ^ See Gregory, Prolegomena^ pp. 366 seq. 

2 See Gregory, Prolegomena^ p. 355. 

3 I.e., p. xxiii, note. ^ H. & P., 91. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 199 

acter as A.^ So also does the Codex Ambrosianus of the Law, 
assigned to the fifth century by Ceriani.''^ 

To these may be added the Codex Bodleianus of Genesis of 
the eighth century. ^ These represent an Alexandrian official 
text, but probably later than the revision of Hesychius. 

E. Klostermann * thinks that the recension of Hesychius is 
represented by Codex Vaticanus, gr. 566.^ Ceriani claims the 
text of Codex Marchalianus for Hesychius.^ 

So far as the New Testament is concerned, Hort thinks that 
the text of A is mixed with both Syrian and Western readings. 
Silberstein has made a careful examination of the text of 3 
Kings (1 Kings of our Bible), and finds that of the 259 Hexa- 
pla additions as indicated by the asterisk, nine-tenths appear 
in A, and that there can be no doubt of the dependence of this 
text upon the recension of Origen.'^ 

Similar detailed work on all the books of the Old and New 
Testaments is necessary before the exact relation of A to Origen 
and Hesychius and the earlier Alexandrian text can be fully 
determined. 

" The text of A stands in broad contrast to those of either B 
or ^, though the interval of years is probably small. The con- 
trast is greatest in the Gospels, where A has a fundamentally 
Syrian text, mixed occasionally with pre-Syrian readings, chiefly 
Western. In the other books the Syrian base disappears, though 
a Syrian occurs among the other elements. In the Acts and 
Epistles the Alexandrian outnumber the Western readings. All 
books except the Gospels, and especially the Apocalypse, have 
many pre-Syrian readings not belonging to either of the aberrant 
types ; in the Gospels these readings are of rare occurrence. By 
a curious and apparently unnoticed coincidence the text of A in 
several books agrees with the Latin Vulgate in so many peculiar 
readings devoid of Old Latin attestation as to leave little doubt 
that a Greek MS. largely employed by Jerome in this revision of 

1 Cornill, JEzekiel, s. 71. 

^ Monumenta Sacra et Profana, III., Medio!., 1864. See also Swete, ?.c.,. 
p. xxvi, for a full description. 

3 See Swete, I.e., p. xxvi. * Analecta, s. 10. ^ H. & P., 26. 

^ Ceriani, de Codice Marchaliano. See Nestle in Urtext und Uebersetzungen, 
s. 73. 

7 Z. A. T. W., 1893, s. 68, 69; 1894, s. 26. 



200 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the Latin version must have had to a great extent a common 
original with A." ^ 

Hort thinks that " Not a single Greek MS. of any age , . . 
has transmitted to us an Alexandrian text of any part of the 
New Testament free from large mixture with other texts." ^ 

VIII. The Text of the Hexapla 

The uncial manuscript Marchalianus of the Prophets, dating 
from the sixth or seventh century, represents the Greek text 
of Origen's Hexapla on the margin. ^ The chief authority 
for this text, however, is the Codex Sarravianus in Ley den, 
containing the Heptateuch.* Codex Yenetus, gr. 1, may be 
added on the authority of Lagarde, Ceriani, and Giesebrecht.^ 
Cornill adds also the cursives, Codex Chisianus of the Prophets,^ 
the Codex Barberinus of the Prophets.''' The Codex Coislini- 
anus,^ containing the Octateuch, also has the text of the Hex- 
apla. The recently discovered Hexapla of a section of the 
Psalms gives us the exact copy of the work of Origen. The 
other manuscripts need careful comparison with this so soon as 
it may be published. 

There is no evidence that Origen or Eusebius or Pamphilus 
issued a revised text of the New Testament. 

IX. The So-called Western Text 

The Codex Bezse, D,^ of the Gospels and Acts, from the sixth 
century, contains "substantially a Western text of Cent. II., 
with occasional readings probably due to Cent. IV. . . . 
Western texts of the Pauline Epistles are preserved in two 

1 Westcott and Hort, Keio Testament in GreeTc, Introduction, 1882, p. 152. 
'■^ I.e., p. 150. 

3 This is XIL of H. & P. See Cornill, EzeUel, s. 15 ; Nestle, I.e., s. 73. 
^ H. & P., IV. and V.; published in phototype by Omont, Leyden, 1897. See 
Strack, Lc, s. 196 ; Nestle, Urtext und Uebersetzung, s. 72. 

5 H. c& P., 23. E. Klostermann, Analecta, s. 9-10, 34, shows that it belongs 
with H. & P., XI., Vat. gr. 2106, making up a complete Old Testament. 

6 This manuscript alone gives the old Greek translation of Daniel; all others 
give Theodotion. 

"^ H. <fc P., 86, contains the Prophets except Daniel. 

8 B. & P., X. See Buhl, Z.c, s. 138 ; Nestle, I.e., s. 72. 

s See Gregory, Prolegomena, pp. 369 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 201 

independent uncials, Dg and Gg."^ This Western text is thus 
described by Hort: 

"The chief and most constant characteristic of the Western 
readings is a love of paraphrase. Words, clauses, and even whole 
sentences, were changed, omitted, and inserted with astonishing 
freedom, wherever it seemed that the meaning could be brought 
out with greater force and definiteness. They often exhibit a cer- 
tain rapid vigour and fluency which can hardly be called a rebellion 
against the calm and reticent strength of the apostolic speech, for 
it is deeply influenced by it, but which, not less than a tamer spirit 
of textual correction, is apt to ignore pregnancy and balance of 
sense, and especially those meanings which are conveyed by 
exceptional choice or collocation of words. . . . 

"Another equally important characteristic is a disposition to 
enrich the text at the cost of its purity by alterations or additions 
taken from traditional and perhaps from apocryphal or other non- 
biblical sources. . . . 

" Besides these two marked characteristics, the Western read- 
ings exhibit the ordinary tendencies of scribes whose changes are 
not limited to wholly or partially mechanical corruptions. . . . 

" As illustrations may be mentioned the insertion and multipli- 
cation of genitive pronouns, but occasionally their suppression 
where they appeared cumbrous ; the insertion of objects, genitive, 
dative, or accusative, after verbs used absolutely ; the insertion of 
conjunctions in sentences which had none, but occasionally their 
excision where their force was not perceived, and the form of the 
sentence or context seemed to commend abruptness ; free inter- 
change of conjunctions; free interchange of the formulae intro- 
ductory to spoken words ; free interchange of participle and finite 
verb with two finite verbs connected by a conjunction ; substitu- 
tion of compound verbs for simple as a rule, but conversely where 
the compound verb of the true text was diflicult or unusual ; and 
substitution of aorists for imperfects as a rule, but with a few 
examples of the converse, in which either a misunderstanding of 
the context or an outbreak of untimely vigour has introduced the 
imperfect. A bolder form of correction is the insertion of a nega- 
tive particle, as in Mt. 21^^ (ou being favoured, it is true, by the 
preceding rov), Lk. 11^^, and Rom. 4^^; or its omission, as in 
Eom. 5^*, Gal. 2% 5'. 

" Another impulse of scribes abundantly exemplified in Western 
readings is the fondness for assimilation. In its most obvious 

1 Westcott and Hort, I.e., pp. 148, 149. D^ = Codex Claromontanus ; 
G^ = Codex Bornerianus. 



202 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

form it is merely local, abolisliing diversities of diction where the 
same subject-matter recurs as part of two or more neighbouring 
clauses or verses, or correcting apparent defects of symmetry. 
But its most dangerous work is ^ harmonistic ' corruption ; that is, 
the partial or total obliteration of differences in passages other- 
wise more or less resembling each other. Sometimes the assimi- 
lation is between single sentences that happen to have some matter 
in common ; more usually, however, between parallel passages of 
greater length, such especially as have in some sense a common 
origin. To this head belong not only quotations from the Old 
Testament, but parts of Ephesians and Colossians, and again of 
Jude and 2 Peter, and, above all, the parallel records in the first 
three Gospels, and to a certain extent in all four." ^ 

There are great differences of opinion as to the value of this 
Western text, especially between British and German scholars. ^ 

Eendel Harris, in his recent study of this text, makes the 
following statements : 

^^ So extensively has the Greek text of Codex Bezse been modi- 
fied by the process of Latinization that we can no longer regard D 
as a distinct authority apart from it. In the first instance it may 
have been such; or, on the other hand, it may have been the ori- 
ginal from which the first Latin translation was made. But it is 
probably safe to regard D -f d as representing a single bilingual 
tradition. . . . 

" It is the Bezan Latin that is of prime importance, while the 
Greek has no certain value except luhere it differs from its own 
Latin, and must not any longer be regarded as an independent 
authority. . . . 

" The coincidences between D and Irenseus take us again to a 
primitive translation that cannot be as late as the end of the 
second century. And finally, an examination of the relicts of 
Tatian's Harmony, and of the Syriac Versions shows reason for 

1 Westcott and Hort, I.e., pp. 122-125. 

2 "Eine ratselhafte Handschrift, liber dereii Wert die Meinungen weit ausei- 
nander geheii. Wahrend die einen in ihr das einzigartige Denkmal einer zwar 
verwilderten, aber sicherlich manches Urspriingliche entlialtenden Textesgestalt 
erblicken, wie sie vor der endlichen Konstituierung des Kanons verbreitet 
gewesen, gilt sie anderen als der Hauptreprasentant des durch willklirliche 
Aenderungen und Interpolationen entstellten sogen. Occidentalischen (west- 
ern) Textes, und dazwischen stehen eine Anzahl Sonderauffassungen, welcbe 
ihrerseits der Eigenart der unter alien Umstanden hochbedeutsamen Urkunde 
Rechnungzu tragen suchen." Von Gebhardt in Urtext und Uebersetzungen der 
BibeL s. 31. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 203 

believing that the bilingual at least as concerns the Gospels is 
older than Tatian."^ 

Harris thinks that the Western text is Roman of the second 
century and that Tatian, who studied and taught at Rome, used 
it in his Diatessaron.^ 

Still more recently Resch advanced the theory that the 
differences in the great original Texts are due to independent 
translations of a Hebrew original.^ Chase endeavours to show 
a strong Syrian influence.^ Blass has given strong reasons for 
the opinion that the Western text of Acts rests upon another 
edition of the original than that used by the other ancient 
family of manuscripts.^ Harris in consideration of these theo- 
ries adheres to his opinion, yet recognizes the force of Blass' 
arguments. 

X. The So-called Text of Lucian 

The Western text of the New Testament has apparently 
nothing exactly to correspond with it in the Greek text of the 
Old Testament. This is due to the defects of the Greek manu- 
scripts of this text, in that they contain parts of the New Tes- 
tament alone. It cannot escape attention, however, that whilst 
this text is sustained by the most ancient Latin and Syriac 
texts of the New Testament, these same ancient Latin and 
Syriac texts in the Old Testament sustain the so-called text of 
Lucian. Driver and Mez ^ both call attention to this and sum 
up the evidence. Mez calls attention to the facts that Ceriani^ 
saw the agreement of the old Latin with Lucian in Lamenta- 
tions ; Yercellone ^ for the codex of Leon, Wellhausen for 
Samuel, Jacob for the book of Esther, Silberstein ^ for the first 
book of Kings. Driver says : ^^ 

1 Codex BezcB in Texts and Studies, Cambridge, 11. 1, pp. 114, 161, 192. 
2Z.c.,p. 234. 

3 Resch, Agrapha, 1892, pp. 350, 351 ; Die Logia Jesu nach dem Griechischen 
und Hehraischen Text loiederhergestellt, 1898. 

* Chase, The Old Syriac Element in the Text of Cod. Bezce, 1893. 

5 Blass, Studien und Krit., 1894, s. 86-120; Acta Apost., 1896; Evangelium 
secundum Lucam secundum formam quae videtur Bomanam, 1897. 

6 Driver, Samuel, p. Ixxvii ; Mez, Bie Bihel des Josephus, 1895, s. 81. 
'' Ceriani, Mon. Sacr. et Prof an., 1861, I. 1, p. xvi. {Addenda). 

8 Vercellone, Vai-icB Lectiones, II. 436. 

9 Z, A. T. W., 1893, s. 20. lo Samuel, 1890, pp. Ixxvii, Ixxviii. 



204 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

" The conclusion which the facts observed authorize is thus that 
the Old Latin is a version made, or revised, on the basis of MSS. 
agreeing closely with those which were followed by Lucian in 
framing his recension. The Old Latin must date from the second 
century a.d. ; hence it cannot be based upon the recension of 
Lucian as such : its peculiar interest lies in the fact that it affords 
independent evidence of the existence of MSS. containing Lu- 
cian's characteristic readings (or renderings), considerably before 
the time of Lucian himself.'' 

Mez carefully examines the citations from the Old Testament 
in Josephus, Antiq., Books V.-VIL, and reaches the conclusion 
that the so-called text of Lucian is older than Josephus, and 
that Theodotion made a revision of it. 

The Codex Yaticanus 330 was recognized by Field and then 
by Lagarde as giving essentially the text of Lucian. This 
manuscript vras the chief authority for the text of the Com- 
plutensian Polyglot.-^ 

In the New^ Testament the recension of Lucian is not known 
to exist in any manuscript. This is just as striking as the 
absence of Western readings from manuscripts of the Old 
Testament. 

XL The Later Syrian Text 

Westcott and Hort distinguish between an earlier and later 
Syriac revision, and are willing to ascribe the earlier to Lucian. 
But all the manuscripts except those of the families thus far 
specified, and consequently the vast majority of all existing 
manuscripts, belong to the later Syriac revision. Westcott and 
Hort do not distinguish the earlier Syrian readings and make 
no effort to ascertain the text of Lucian. Here they are weak. 
This is their view of Syrian readings : 

"The fundamental text of late extant Greek MSS. generally 
is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochian 
or Grseco-Syrian text of the second half of the fourth century. 
The community of text implies on genealogical grounds a com- 
munity of parentage: the Antiochian Fathers and the bulk of 

1 Eield, Origenis HexapL, I., Prol., p. Ixxxviii; Cornill, JEzekiel, s. 65 ; Buhl, 
Z.c, s. 140. Lagarde also used for Lucian, H. &P., 19, 44, 82, 93, 108, 118, and 
Cornill, H.&P., 22, 23, 36, 48, 51, 231. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 205 

extant MSS. written from about three or four to ten or eleven 
centuries later must have had in the greater number of extant 
variations a common original either contemporary with or older 
than our oldest extant MSS., which thus lose at once whatever 
presumption of exceptional purity they might have derived from 
their exceptional antiquity alone." ^ 

This text presupposes the work of Lucian and other rival texts. 

" The guiding motives of their criticism are transparently dis- 
played in its effects. It was probably initiated by the distracting 
and inconvenient currency of at least three conflicting texts in the 
same region. The alternate borrowing from all implies that no 
selection of one was made, — indeed it is difficult to see how under 
the circumstances it could have been made — as entitled to su- 
premacy by manifest superiority of pedigree. Each text may 
perhaps have found a patron in some leading personage or see, 
and thus have seemed to call for a conciliation of rival claims." ^ 

The general characteristics of these texts are as follows : 

" Both in matter and in diction the Syrian text is conspicuously 
a full text. It delights in pronouns, conjunctions, and expletives, 
and supplied links of all kinds, as well as in more considerable 
additions. As distinguished from the bold vigour of the ' West- 
ern ' scribes, and the refined scholarship of the Alexandrians, the 
spirit of its own corrections is at once sensible and feeble. En- 
tirely blameless on either literary or religious grounds as regards 
vulgarised or unworthy diction, yet shewing no marks of either 
critical or spiritual insight, it presents the New Testament in a 
form smooth and attractive, but appreciably impoverished in sense 
and force, more fitted for cursory perusal or recitation than for 
repeated and diligent study." ^ 

Great progress has been made in recent years in the classi- 
fication of the manuscripts ; but much still remains to be done. 
It seems to be evident that B, >^, and their group represent a text 
earlier than any of the revisions of the third century. We 
are in the way of determining the text of the Old Testament 
as revised by Origen and Lucian. The general character and 
antiquity of the so-called Western text of the New Testament 
has been established, and the tendency is to an increasing esti- 
mate of its value as compared with B. The relation of that 

1 Westcott and Hort, I.e., p. 92. 2 Westcott and Hort, I.e., pp. 133, 134. 
3 AVestcott and Hort, Z.c, p. 135. 



206 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

text to the New Testament revision of Lucian and to the Old 
Testament Lucian has still to be determined. The school of 
Westcott and Hort halt in their study of the Syrian text. It 
is necessary to distinguish between the late Syrian and the 
earlier Syrian text. They seem altogether uncertain as regards 
the earlier Syrian text. It is probable that these questions of 
Textual Criticism will have to be determined by the special 
study of all the different writings of the Old Testament. 
Back of the codices of the third century lie libraries of rolls, 
and in these libraries each roll had a history of its own. The 
future work of the Textual Criticism of the Greek Bible is 
largely in the second century B»c. 

XII. Printed Texts of the Greek Bible 

1. The first printed text of the Greek Bible is in the Com- 
plutensian Polyglot, 1514-1517.^ This text was revised in the 
Antwerp Polyglot, 1569-1572, and the Paris Polyglot, 1645. 

2. Erasmus published his Greek New Testament in five 
editions, 1516-1535. Luther translated from the second edition 
of 1519.2 

3. The Aldine edition^ of the Old Testament was published 
at Venice, 1518. 

4. Robert Stephens issued four editions of the Greek New 
Testament, 1546-1551. He used in addition to Erasmus and 
the Complutensian, fifteen manuscripts,^ and for the first time 
in 1551 divided the Greek text into verses. 

5. Theodore Beza issued four editions of the Greek New 
Testament, in folio, 1565-1598, and five octavo editions, 1565- 
1604. He knew of D of the Epistles, but seems to have made 
little use of it.^ 

1 This text was based on the Vatican codices 330, 346 (H. & P., 108, 248), 
and a few manuscripts of minor importance in Madrid, such as Venet. Y. (H. 
& F.,6S). 

'^ Erasmus used several manuscripts of Basle, Evv. 1, 2 ; Acts 2 ; Apoc. 1, 
and for the third edition Ev. 61. 

3 It was based on H. & P., 29, 68, 121 ; Lagarde, Mitt. 2, 57 ; Sept. St. 1, 
2 ; Nestle, in Urtext und Uehersetzungen^ s. 65. 

* He used but slightly D and L of the Gospels. 

5 Ezra Abbot, Critical Essays, 1888, p. 210. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 207 

6. In 1586 there was published at Rome the Sixtine edition 
of the Greek Old Testament. This was based on B, but the 
parts lacking in B were supplied from other manuscripts, which 
were not indicated. This text was also given in the London 
Polyglot, 1657, with a critical apparatus and various readings.^ 

7. The Elzevirs of Leyden issued a series of editions of the 
Greek New Testament from 1624 onward. The second edition 
of the year 1633 claimed to give the received text of the New 
Testament. But there was no intrinsic merit in these editions 
based on manuscript authority to justify this reputation. 

In the eighteenth century numerous efforts were made to 
give better texts. 

8. MiU issued his New Testament at Oxford in 1707, the 
text of Stephens of 1550 with a rich critical apparatus. 

9. The Codex Alexandrinus was published by Grabe, Lee, 
and Wigan at Oxford in 1707-1720 with prolegomena. 

10. Bengel issued his critical text of the New Testament in 
1734. He arranged the manuscripts in two families, the Afri- 
can and the Asiatic. 

11. Wetstein published his New Testament in 1751-1752 at 
Amsterdam, with prolegomena and critical apparatus from the 
manuscripts. He was the first to designate the manuscripts 
with letters and numbers. 

12. Semler and his pupil Griesbach in their New Testament 
Criticism divided the manuscripts into three classes : the West- 
ern, the Alexandrian, and the Byzantine. Griesbach sums up 
the characteristics of the two older texts in the phrase " gram- 
maticum egit alexandrinus censor, interpretem occidentalis."^ 
His New Testament appeared in several editions from 1774- 
1806 ; see especially small edition of 1805. 

13. Holmes and Parsons issued their Greek Old Testament 
at Oxford 1798-1827, citing a mass of manuscripts which they 
arranged in families in accordance with the great historical 
editions of the third century, Lucian, Hesy chins and Origen. 
They used 20 Uncials and 277 Minuscules.^ 

1 These are from A, D ; also, according to Nestle, Lc, p. 66; H. <& P., IV., 
XIL, 60, 75, 86. 3 gee Nestle, I.e., s. 66, 67. 

2 Gregory, Prolegomena, pp. 187, 188 ; see 0. von Gebhardt, I.e., s. 44. 



208 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

14. Lachmann's New Testament appeared in two editions, 
1831 and 1850. He disregarded printed texts and limited his 
text so far as possible to the text^ of the Eastern family of 
manuscripts. 

Schaff compiles a number of testimonies to Lachmann, and 
endorses them as follows : 

Tregelles says (p. 99) : "Lachmann led the way in casting aside 
the so-called textiis receptus, and boldly placing the JSTew Testa- 
ment wholly and entirely on the basis of actual authority." Eeuss 
calls him (BibliotJi., p. 239) "vir doctissimus et KpLTLKwraro^.^' The 
conservative Dr. Scrivener (p. 422 seq.) depreciates his merits, 
for he defends, as far as possible, the traditional text. But Dr. 
Hort (Gr. Testy II. 23) does full justice to his memory: "A new 
period began in 1831, when, for the first time, a text was construed 
directly from the ancient documents without the intervention of 
any printed edition, and when the first systematic attempt was 
made to substitute scientific method for arbitrary choice in the 
discrimination of various readings. In both respects the editor, 
Lachmann, rejoiced to declare that he was carrying out the prin- 
ciples and unfulfilled intentions of Bentley, as set forth in 1716 
and 1720.'^ Abbot says of Lachmann (in Schaff's Belig. Encycl, 
I. 275) : " He was the first to found a text wholly on ayident evi- 
dence ; and his editions, to which his eminent reputation as a 
critic gave wide currency, especially in Germany, did much toward 
breaking down the superstitious reverence for the textus receptusJ' ^ 

15. Tischendorf laboured for thirty years on the text of the 
Greek Bible. His first edition of the New Testament appeared 
in 1840, of the Old Testament in 1850. His last edition of the 
Old Testament was issued in 1860, of the New Testament in 
1864-1872. He died before completing the prolegomena. The 
prolegomena to the New Testament was prepared by Gregory 
after consulting about a thousand manuscripts, and published 
in 1884-1894. Tischendorf discovered the Sinaitic codex and 
many other valuable manuscripts and has done more for the 
Greek Bible than any one since Origen. 

1 He used manuscripts A, B, C, and P, Q, T, Z of the Gospels, and H of the 
Epistles. He called in the Western text of D, E, for Acts and G for Epistles, to 
decide when there was difference between the Orientals. See von Gebhardt, 
I.e., 46. 

'^ Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament, 1883, pp. 256, 257. 



HISTORY OF THE TEXT OF THE GREEK BIBLE 209 

16. Tregelles also devoted his life to the New Testament 
text and published his works from 1844-1879. 

17. The last and in some respects the most solid work on 
the text of the NeAV Testament is the New Testament of West- 
cott and Hort, 1881, with an introduction which is the most 
valuable contribution to the Textual Criticism of the New 
Testament that has yet appeared ; their text was prepared in 
accordance with the genealogical principle and on the basis of 
the distinction of four families of manuscripts, the preference 
as to age belonging to the neutral text of B. 

18. The Cambridge school have also given us the best text of 
the Greek Old Testament in Swete's edition, 1887-1894, based 
on the correct text of B, which is the earliest and most im- 
portant authority, with various readings from the other chief 
authorities. This is preparatory to a much larger work in 
course of preparation for the University Press by Swete, 
Brooke, and McLean, with a complete critical apparatus. 

19. The plan of Lagarde to edit the chief ancient texts of 
the Old Testament was begun with his edition of the text of 
Lucian, but he died after completing the first volume, 1883. The 
more recent work in textual criticism has been in the detailed 
labour upon particular books, in which many scholars have 
done distinguished work. A most important work on the 
New Testament has been the editing of a number of the writ- 
ings of the New Testament by Weiss, and of the Acts and 
Luke by Blass. 



CHAPTER IX 

THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 

A NUMBER of early versions were made from the Hebrew 
text of the Old Testament and the Greek text of the New 
Testament. 

I. The Aramaic Versions 

The Aramaic versions began in the synagogues of Palestine, 
Syria, and the Orient, among the Aramaic-speaking Jews, as 
a necessity of worship in the synagogue, not later than the 
second century B.C. But the translations were oral, by scribes 
who had a competent knowledge of both the Hebrew and the 
Aramaic. Such Aramaic translations were in use in the times 
of Jesus and His apostles, and were doubtless used by Jesus 
and His apostles in their public ministry. The citations from 
the Old Testament in the primitive Gospels were from these 
Aramaic popular translations. 

It is the opinion of many modern critics ^ that the citations 
from the Old Testament in the New Testament were never 
made from the Hebrew text, but always from the Greek Tar- 
gum or the Aramaic Targum. These Targums were modified 
and improved by paraphrase and explanation from time to 
time before they were committed to writing. Those that have 

1 Bohl, Forschiingen nach eine Volkshibel zur Zeit Jesu, Wien, 1873 ; 
Alttest. Citate in jVeuen Test., Wien, 1878; Toy, Quotations in the New Test., 
1884 ; Neubauer, Studia Bihlica., I. 3. Turpie, The Old Testament in the Xew, 
1868, pp. 266 seq., classifies the 278 citations as follows : 53 agree with both the 
Septuagint and the Massoretic text, 10 agree with the Massoretic text alone, 37 
agree with the Septuagint, 175 agree with neither, 3 have nothing to corre- 
spond with them in the Old Testament. This is strongly in favour of the use of 
an Aramaic Targum by the New Testament writers. 

210 



THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 211 

been preserved are in tlie western dialect of the Aramaic, 
although they were modified in their subsequent use in the 
synagogues of the Orientals by the introduction of an eastern 
Aramaic colouring. These Targums do not in all respects 
conform to the official text of the Sopherim. They represent 
in some respects an earlier text. The earliest of these Tar- 
gums, called the Targum of Onkelos, is limited to the Law.^ 
It is written in the Judaic dialect. It exhibits the character- 
istics of the Sopherim in its effort to avoid anthropomorphisms, 
obscene allusions, and everything unworthy of God in the Jew- 
ish religion. But it paraphrases and endeavours to explain the 
original.'^ A later Targum on the Law not earlier than the 
seventh century, called the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan, by 
mistake for Yerushalmi, paraphrases still more largely. It is 
in a later dialect of Aramaic. Another Targum Yerushalmi 
has been preserved only in fragments. 

An early Targum on the Prophets, called the Targum 
of Jonathan ben Uzziel, written in the Judaic dialect has been 
preserved. The Talmud ^ alludes to him as a pupil of Hillel 
and as writing a paraphrase of the Prophets. This translation 
has been much changed by oral transmission. It is thought 
by Schurer and Buhl that Joseph the Blind revised it ; but 
Dalman and Nestle deny it. Certainly it preserves much 
earlier material, which is not in accord with the Hebrew text 
of the Sopherim or their interpretation.* 

These Targnms represent the oral translations of the Law 
and the Prophets, as used in the worship of the synagogue. 
The Targums on the other books are all much later and for 
private use. The Targums on Psalms and Job are in the 

1 It seems probable that the traditional Onkelos and Aquila are really the 
same persons, the pupil of Akiba. But there is evidently a mistake of tradi- 
tional ascription. There is no similarity between the Greek version of Aquila 
and this Aramaic version. Its method and principles are wide apart. 

2 It was first printed in 1482 at Bologna with Hebrew text and commentary 
of Rashi, and frequently in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The best 
edition is Berliner, Targum Onkelos^ 1884. It was translated with other Tar- 
gums by Etheridge, 1862-1865. 

3 Baha Bathm. VIII. 134 a ; Megilla, f. 3 a. 

* The name of Jonathan is thought by some to be a variation of Theodotion. 
This Targum is printed in the Rabbinical Bibles and great Polyglots. 



212 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

manner of Jonathan, and probably by the same author. The 
Targum of the Proverbs is nearer to the Hebrew text. 
The Targum on the five Rolls is ascribed to Joseph the Blind 
by tradition, but really is not earlier than the eleventh cen- 
tury. ^ There are two Targums on Esther,^ and a Targum on 
Daniel of the twelfth century.'*^ A Targum on Chronicles 
of the ninth century ^ resembles closely the Syriac translation 
in the Syriac Old Testament and may have been made from it. 
All of the Writings have Targums except Ezra and Nehemiah ; 
but these Targums were private and not official.^ 



II. The Syriac Bible 

The earliest translation of the Greek Ncav Testament into 
Syriac, known to us, is the Diatessaron of Tatian. Next to 
this in antiquity is apparently the text recently discovered in 
1893 by Mrs. Lewis, and published by Bensly, Harris, Burkill, 
and Mrs. Lewis herself, 1894-1896. Still later is the Cureton- 
ian Syriac Gospels, discovered by Cureton in 1858.^ The Old 
Testament was translated from the Hebrew into the Syriac for 
the most part in the second Christian century, and the other 
books of the New Testament from the Greek so far as the 
Syrian Church recognized the Sacred Writings as canonical. 
The official Syriac Bible, called the Peshitto or Peshitta,^ was 
of gradual origin on the basis of these older translations. 

The Syriac Bible was revised under the influence of Lucian 
and assimilated to his text of the Septuagint as well as the 
Greek New Testament. Another version was made in 508 by 
Philoxenis from the Greek, and this was revised by Thomas of 
Haraklea in 616 a.d. 

1 These Targums are in the Rabbinical Bibles and great Polyglots. 

2 The earliest of these is in Walton's Polyglot ; the other was printed by 
Francis Taylor, London, 1655. 

3 It is in manuscript in the National Library at Paris. 
* It was published by Beck, Augsburg, 1680-1683. 

s Buhl, I.e., s. 183. 

6 Cureton, Bemains of a very Ancient Becension of the Four Gospels in Syriac, 
London, 1858. 

■^ Peshitto is the western Syriac, Peshitta the eastern Syriac, pronunciation. 



THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 213 

III. The Latin Vulgate 

Jerome, the greatest biblical scholar of ancient times, devoted 
a large portion of his life to the revision of the Latin Bible. 
At first he made a revision of the Italian Latin version used 
in Rome. He revised the Psalter, and it was used in the 
Roman churches in Venice until recent times. It is still used 
in Milan as the Roman Psalter. He made a second revision, 
which has been used in the Church of France as the Galilean 
Psalter. He finally undertook to make a new translation from 
the Hebrew text under the help of Bar Anina, a learned Jew. 
The Greek versions, especially that of Symmachus, were kept 
in view. The Hebrew text used by him was the text of the 
Sopherim. The version was begun in 390 and completed in 
405 A.D. The version of Jerome supplanted the older Latin 
versions ; but not without mixture with them in the ecclesias- 
tical manuscripts which have come down to us in the uses of 
the Latin Church. He did not translate the Apocrypha. 
These came from the old versions. 

The earliest manuscript of the Vulgate is the Codex Amia- 
tinus, prepared shortly before 716 a.d.,i in the Laurentian 
Library, Florence. The Codex Toletanus at Toledo is said to 
belong to the eighth century. The Codex Fuldensis of the 
New Testament, in the abbey of Fuldo, dates from 546. ^ The 
Vulgate was first printed in 1450 at Mainz, and in many sub- 
sequent incunabula editions, said to be more than two hundred 
in number, before 1517 A.D. The first critical edition is in the 
Complutensian Polyglot, 1517. Protestant editions were issued 
by Andreas Osiander in 1522, and by Robert Stephens at Paris, 
1523 seq.^ and much improved in 1540. The Tridentine Coun- 
cil, in 1546, declared the Vulgate to be the official text of the 
Bible. Efforts were then made to prepare an official text. 
The Sixtine edition was issued in 1590, under the patronage 
of Pope Sixtus v., as the official edition. This was withdrawn 
after the death of the pope, and a new text undertaken under 
the advice of Bellarmin, and issued in 1592 as the Clementine 

1 See Studia Bihlica, II. pp. 273, 324. 

2 Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament, p. 151. 



214 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

text under Clement VIII., and again in 1593, and finally in a 
more correct form in 1598. 

A modern edition of the Vulgate was published in 1822 by 
Leander Van Ess, who devoted many years to a critical study 
of it.i 

IV. The Arabic Version 

The Arabic version was made in the tenth century from the 
Hebrew text of the Old Testament by Rabbi Saadia ha Gaon 
(942f). The author was a fine Hebrew and Arabic scholar, 
and his translation is excellent. At times it paraphrases after 
the manner of the Targums.^ 

V. A Persian Version 

A Persian version of the Law was made from the Massoretic 
Hebrew text in the first half of the sixteenth century by Rabbi 
Jacob Tawus. It is literal and follows closely the revisions of 
Aquila and Saadia. It is in the London Polyglot. 



VI. English Versions 

The Anglo-Saxon versions and the early English versions of 
Wicklif and the Poor Friars were made from the Latin Vul- 
gate ; but during the period of the Reformation, the English 
Protestant Reformer, William Tyndale, translated from the 
Massoretic Hebrew text and the Greek New Testament. He 
translated the New Testament in 1524-1525. He then translated 
the Law, which was published in 1530, and the book of Joshua 
in 1531. He probably translated other portions of the Old 
Testament also before his death, but they were not published. 
Miles Coverdale translated the whole Bible from the Latin, 

i Yan Ess, Pragm. Krit. Gesch. d. Vulg., Tiibingen, 1824 ; Kaulen, Gesch. 
der Vulg., Mainz, 1868. 

2 Another Arabic version was made in the eleventh centmy, but it has been 
interpolated from the Syriac by a Christian hand. It has been preserved only in 
the book of Joshua and 1 K. 12 to 2 K. 12^6, and Neh. 1-9^'^. How much more 
of it there was we know not. There is also a translation of the Law by an Afri- 
can Jew of the thirteenth century, published by Erpeuius in 1622. 



THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 215 

the German of Luther, and the Zurich Bible, under the au- 
thority of Cromwell, and it was published in 1535. 

John Rogers (pseudo-Thomas Matthew) was the literary 
executor of Tyndale. He published a folio edition of the 
Bible in 1537. He used Tyndale for the Pentateuch, and 
Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and 1 Chronicles, and for the 
New Testament ; but the rest of the Bible was Coverdale's. 

Richard Taverner, under the advice of Cromwell, undertook 
to revise the English Bible, which he did in 1539. He returns 
to the Vulgate in the Old Testament, but in the New Testa- 
ment he is more faithful to the original Greek. 

Coverdale, under the instruction of Cromwell, undertook an- 
other revision and produced what is known as the Great Bible, 
which was published in 1539. The second edition, 1540, had a 
preface by Cranmer. This became the authorized version and 
remained such for twenty -eight years. The larger part of the 
Scriptures in the Prayer Book of 1549-1552 are from this 
Bible. 

The English exiles at Geneva, William Whittingham, Thomas 
Sampson, Anthony Gilby, and others, made the so-called Geneva 
Version. The New Testament was translated from the original 
Greek by Whittingham in 1557. It is a revision of Tyndale 
under the influence of Beza. The Old Testament was trans- 
lated from the Hebrew by Sampson, Gilby, and others, and was 
published in 1560. This became the standard Bible for the 
Puritan ministers of England until the version of King James 
took its place. 

Archbishop Parker undertook a new revision, and the work 
was distributed among a number of bishops, deans, and 
scholars. It was at last finished and published in 1568. It 
was revised again in 1572, and became known as the Bishops' 
Bible. 

The Roman Catholics undertook an English version based 
on the Vulgate but keeping the other versions in view. The 
New Testament appeared in 1582 at Rheims, the Old Testa- 
ment in 1609 at Douay. 

And so three great parties in England were represented by 
three English versions of the Bible. 



216 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

King James, in accordance with the petition of the Puritans 
at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604, authorized a new 
version. Fifty-four scholars were appointed, divided into six 
companies, to do the work. Bilson, Bishop of Winchester, and 
Dr. Miles Smith were the final revisers. It was published in 
1611, and eventually drove all the Protestant versions from 
the field. They used Beza's Greek Testament of 1589. It 
remains the common version of the English-speaking Protes- 
tants until the present time.^ 

An Anglo-American revision was made by a large company 
of scholars representing the different Protestant religious bodies 
of Great Britain and America. It was completed and. published, 
the New Testament in 1881, the Old Testament in 1884. The 
New Testament revision was based on the use of all the re- 
sources of modern Textual Criticism. The Old Testament revi- 
sion was based on the currently used Massoretic text, without 
any attempt to use the resources of the modern Textual Criti- 
cism of the Old Testament. It is satisfying neither to the 
people, who are attached to the common version and see no 
sufficient reason for abandoning it, nor to scholars, who are 
displeased with the excessive conservatism and pedantry which 
characterize it, especially in the Old Testament. It is very 
desirable that, when the next revision takes place, Roman 
Catholics and Protestants may unite in it. 

VII. Other Versions 

(1) The G-erman Bible. 

German Bibles were among the first books to appear from 
the press after the invention of printing. Fourteen editions of 
the High German Bible appeared between 1466 and 1518, be- 
sides four editions of the Low German Bible. These were all 
translations from the Latin Vulgate. Martin Lu.ther made 
the Bible used by the German people since the Reformation. 
He issued the New Testament in 1522, the Pentateuch in 1523, 
and finally completed the Bible in 1534. Many subsequent edi- 
tions Avere revised by him, until the tenth, 1544-1545. Luther 
i Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament^ pp. 312 seq. 



THE TEANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 217 

translated from the Hebrew Old Testament, using the text of 
Brescia, and from the Greek New Testament, using the edition 
of Erasmus of 1519.^ The Roman Catholics issued several 
rival German Bibles : Emser, in 1527 ; Eck, in 1537 ; and the 
Dominican, Dietenberger, in 1534. This edition was subse- 
quently revised by Ulenberg, in 1630, and at Mainz in 1662, 
and became the German Catholic Bible. In 1863, at Eisenach, 
the JEvangelical Church Diet appointed a Commission for the 
revision of Luther's Bible. The New Testament appeared at 
Halle in 1867, the revised edition in 1870. The Prohehihel 
was published in 1883, the revision was finished in 1892. The 
best German translation of the New Testament is that of 
Weizsacker. Kautzsch has recently issued an excellent trans- 
lation of the Old Testament with critical notes, 2te Aufl., 1896. 

(2) French Versions. 

Lefevre d'Etaples made a French Protestant version of the 
Bible, which was published at Antwerp in 1530 ; but the ver- 
sion of Olivetan, published in 1535 at Neufch^tel and corrected 
by Calvin, obtained wider recognition. Under the influence of 
Calvin, the pastors of Geneva undertook a revision under the 
leadership of Beza, and in 1588 issued a version which main- 
tained its place until the present day. But it is well-nigh sup- 
planted now by a new translation from the original Greek and 
Hebrew bv Dr. Louis Segond. The Old Testament was pub- 
lished in 1874, the New Testament in 1879. 

(3) Dutch Versions. 

A Dutch translation from Luther and the Cologne Bible was 
issued in 1526 by Jacob van Liesveldt. Van Uttenhove made 
a new translation from Luther's Bible with the help of Olive- 
tan's, and published it in 1556. The States-General of Holland 
authorized a new translation in 1624, which was completed and 
published in 1637. It was called the States Bible, and has held 
its place until the present time. The new translation author- 
ized by the General Synod in 1854, and published so far as the 
New Testament is concerned in 1867, has not displaced it. 

(4) Other Translations. 

The Bible was also translated into Italian, Danish, Swedish, 
1 See pp. 186, 206. 



218 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and other modern languages before the Reformation. In the 
era of the Reformation it was translated into all the European 
languages. In more recent years, through the labours of 
foreign missions, it has been translated into the greater part 
of the known languages of the world. But none of these trans- 
lations have any value for the purposes of the criticism of the 
text of Holy Scripture. 



CHAPTER X 

TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTUEB 

We should not hesitate to recognize that a certain kind of 
Textual Criticism was used in the most ancient times by the 
Sopherim and Massorites, who have transmitted to us the tra- 
ditional Hebrew text of the Old Testament. The work of 
Origen, Lucian, Hesychius, and Jerome, upon the Greek Bible 
was also Textual Criticism, so far as they earnestly and indus- 
triously sought to get the best text of Holy Scripture. But all 
this work was carried on in a crude fashion, and without defi- 
nite principles of Textual Criticism. Biblical Textual Criti- 
cism began its work in the era of the lleformation. 

I. Textual Criticism at the Reformation" 

Erasmus led the movement, so far as the Greek Bible is con- 
cerned. In 1505 he edited Yalla's Annotations to the New Tes- 
tament^ in the preface of which he urges a return to the original 
Greek text and its grammatical exposition. In 1516 he issued 
his Greek New Testament. This passed through many editions 
and became the basis for the study of the Greek New Tes- 
tament among Protestants. An impulse to sound criticism 
among Roman Catholics had also been given by the Compluten- 
sian Polyglot of Cardinal Ximenes. 

The Protestant Reformers had given their chief attention to 
the criticism of the Canon, the establishment of the sole au- 
thority of the Scripture, and to its proper interpretation, but 
they had not altogether overlooked the criticism of the text. 
With reference to the Old Testament, they had been chiefly 
influenced by two Jewish scholars, the one Elias Levita, who 
lived and died in the Jewish faith, the other Jacob ben Chayim, 

219 



220 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

who became a Christian. Chayim edited the second edition of 
Bomberg's Rabbinical Bible and issued an elaborate introduc- 
tion to it. He also edited, for the first time, the Massora. It 
was a common opinion among the Jews that the vowel points 
and accents of the Hebrew Scriptures came down from Ezra, 
and even Moses and Adam. Levita explodes these traditions 
by the following simple line of argument : 

" The vowel points and the accents did not exist either before 
Ezra or in the time of Ezra or after Ezra till the close of the 
Talmud. And I shall prove this with clear and conclusive evi- 
dence. (1) In all the writings of our Rabbins of blessed memory 
whether the Talmud, or the Hagadah, or the Midrash, there is 
not to be found any mention whatever of or any allusion to the 
vowel points or accents." (2) and (3) The Talmud in its use of 
the Bible discusses how the words should be read and how divided. 
This is inconsistent with an accented of&cial text. (4) "Almost 
all the names of both the vowel points and the accents are not 
Hebrew, but Aramean and Babylonian." ^ 

The Reformers rejected the inspiration of the Massoretic 
traditional pointing and only accepted the unpointed text. 
Luther does not hesitate to speak of the points as new human 
inventions about which he does not trouble himself, and says, 
" I often utter words which strongly oppose these points," and 
"they are most assuredly not to be preferred to the simple, 
correct, and grammatical sense." ^ He goes to work with the 
best text he can find to give the Word of God to the people. 
So Calvin^ acknowledged that they were the result of great 
diligence and sound tradition, yet to be used with care and 
selection. Zwingli gave great value to the Greek and Latin 
versions and disputed the Massoretic signs.^ 

It is astonishing how far post Reformation Swiss Protestant 
divines allowed themselves to drift away from this position, 
and how greatly they entangled themselves once more in the 
bonds of Rabbinical traditionalism. This was chiefly due to 

1 Levita, Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, edited by Ginsburg, pp. 127 seq. London, 
1867. 

2 Com. on Gen. 47^1 ; on Is. 9^. 

2 Com. on. Zech. IV. * Qpera ed. Sclmlt., V. pp. 556 seq. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 221 

another Jewish scholar, Azzariah de Rossi/ who claims, to use 
the concise statement of Dr. Ginsburg : ^ 

"That as to the origin and deyelopment of the vowels their 
force and virtue were invented by, or commnnicated to, Adam, in 
Paradise ; transmitted to and by Moses ; that they had been par- 
tially forgotten, and their pronunciation vitiated during the Baby- 
lonian captivity ; that they had been restored by Ezra, but that 
they had been forgotten again in the wars and struggles during 
and after the destruction of the second temple ; and that the 
Massorites, after the close of the Talmud, revised the system, 
and permanently fixed the pronunciation by the contrivance of 
the present signs. This accounts for the fact that the present 
vowel points are not mentioned in the Talmud. The reason why 
Moses did not punctuate the copy of the law which he wrote, is 
that its import should not be understood without oral tradition. 
Besides, as the law has seventy different meanings, the writing of 
it, without points, greatly aids to obtain these various interpreta- 
tions ; whereas the afiixing of the vowel signs would preclude all 
permutations and transpositions, and greatly restrict the sense by 
fixing the pronunciation." 

His principal reliance was upon some passages of the book 
Zohar and other cabalistic writings, which he claimed to be 
older than the Mishna, but which have since been shown to be 
greatly interpolated and of questionable antiquity .^ 

Relying upon these, the elder Buxtorf, with his great author- 
ity, misled a large number of the most prominent of the Re- 
formed divines of the continent to maintain the opinion of the 
divine origin and authority of the Massoretic vowel points and 
accents.* In England, Fulke,^ Broughton,^ and Lightfoot ' 
adopted the same opinion. These Rabbinical scholars exerted, 
in this respect, a disastrous influence upon the study of the 
Old Testament. 

1 The Light of the Eyes, n*rt? nixa, 1574-1575, III. 59. 

2 Life of Ml as Levita, in connection with his edition of Levita's Massoreth 
Ha-Massoreth, London, 1867, p. 53. 

^ Ginsburg in I.e., p. 52 ; Wogue, Histoire de la Bible, Paris, 1881, p. 121. 

* Tiberius sive Commentarius Masorethiciis, Basle, 1620. 

^ A Defence of the Sincere and True Translations of the Holy Scriptures into 
the English Tongue, etc., 1583 ; Parker Society edition, 1843, pp. 55, 578, 

^ Daniel: his Chaldee Visions and his Hebreio, London, 1597, on Chap. 9^^. 

"' Choro graphical Century, c. 81 ; Works, Pitman's edition, 1823, Vol. IX. 
pp. 150 seq. 



222 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

II. Textual Criticism in the Seventeenth Century 

The critical principle reasserted itself mightily through Lud- 
wig Cappellus, of the French school of Saumur, where a freer 
tj^pe of theology had maintained itself. A new impulse to 
Hebrew scholarship had been given by Amira, Gabriel Sionita, 
and other Maronites, who brought a wealth of Oriental learning 
to the attention of Christian scholars. Pocock journeyed to 
the East, and returned with rich spoils of Arabic literature. 
France, Holland, and England vied with one another in their 
use of these literary treasures, and urged them for the study 
of the Hebrew Scriptures over against the Rabbinical tradition. 
Erpenius in Holland, the great Arabist, was the teacher of 
Cappellus, and first introduced his work to the public. Cap- 
pellus fell back on the views of Elias Levita, the teacher of the 
Protestant Reformers, and of these Reformers themselves ; and 
denied the inspiration of the Hebrew vowel points and accents, 
and the common Massoretic text ; and insisted upon its revision, 
through the comparison of ancient versions.^ Cappellus was 
sustained by the French theologians generally, even by Rivetus, 
also by Cocceius, the father of the Federal school in Holland, 
who first gave the author's name to the public, and by the body 
of English critics. ^ 

In this connection a series of great Polyglots appeared, 
beginning with the Antwerp of the Jesuit, Arias Montanus, 
assisted by And. Masius, Fabricus Boderianus, and Franz 
Rapheleng ; ^ followed by the Paris Polyglot of Michael de 
Jay,* edited by Morinus and Gabriel Sionita ; and culminating 
in the London Polyglot of Brian Walton, in which he was 
aided by Ed. Castle, Ed. Pocock, Thos. Hyde, and others;^ 
the greatest critical achievement of the seventeenth century, 
which remains as the classic basis for the comparative study of 
versions until the present day. 

1 His work was published anonymously in 1624 at Leyden under the title 
Arcanum punctuationis revelatum, though completed m 1621. 

2 Comp. Schnedermann, Die Controverse des Lud. Cappellus mit den Bux- 
torfen, Leipzig, 1879. 

3 Biblia Begia, 8 vols, folio, 1569-1572. * 1629-1645, 10 vols, folio, 
s 6 vols, folio, 1657. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 223 

The work of Cappellus remained unanswered, and worked 
powerfully until 1648. In the meantime the Roman Catholic 
Frenchman, Morinus, taking the same position as Cappellus, 
pressed it in order to show the need of Church authority and 
tradition. 1 This greatly complicated the discussion by making 
the view a basis for an attack on the Protestant position. The 
younger Buxtorf was stirred up to maintain the traditional 
Rabbinical position against Cappellus.^ The three universities 
of Sedan, Geneva, and Leyden were so aroused against Cap- 
pellus that they refused to allow the publication of his great 
work, Critiea Sacra^ which, however, appeared in 1650, the 
first of a series of corresponding productions.^ Heidegger and 
Turretine rallied the universities of Zurich, Geneva, and Basle 
to the Zurich Consensus, which was adopted in 1675, against 
all the distinguishing doctrines of the school of Saumur, and 
the more liberal type of Calvinism, asserting for the first and 
only time in the symbols of any Christian communion the doc- 
trine of verbal inspiration, together with the inspiration of 
accents and points. 

Thus the formal principle of Protestantism was straitened, 
and its vital power destroyed by the erection of dogmatic 
barriers against Biblical Criticism. " They forgot that they 
by this standpoint again made Christian faith entirely depend- 
ent on tradition; yes, with respect to the Old Testament, on 
the synagogue."* 

The controversy between Brian Walton and John Owen is 
instructive just here. John Owen had prepared a tract ^ in 
which he takes this position: "Nor is it enough to satisfy us 
that the doctrines mentioned are preserved entire ; every tittle 
and iota in the Word of God must come under our considera- 
tion, as being as such from God."^ 

Before the tract was issued he was confronted by the prol- 
egomena to Walton's Bihlia Polyglotta^ which, he perceived, 

1 Exercitationes biblicce, 1633. 

2 Tract, de punct. vocal, et accent, in libr. F., T., heb. origine antiq., 1648. 

3 See Tholuck, Akadem. Leben, II. p. 332. 
* Dorner, Gesch. Prot. Theologies p. 451. 

5 The Divine Original, Authority, and Self-evidencing Light and Purity of 
the Scriptures. 6 Works, XVL p. 303. 



224 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

undermined liis theory of inspiration ; and he therefore added 
an appendix, in which he maintains that : 

" The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were immedi- 
ately and entirely given out by God himself, His mind being in 
them represented unto us without the least interveniency of such 
mediums and ways as were capable of giving change or alteration 
to the least iota or syllable." ^ 

Brian Walton replies to him : 

^^ For when at the beginning of the Reformation, divers ques- 
tions arose about the Scriptures and the Church ; the Eomanists 
observing that the punctuation of the Hebrew text was an inven- 
tion of the Masorites, they thereupon inferred that the text with- 
out the points might be taken in divers senses, and that none was 
tyed to the reading of the Kabbins, and therefore concluded that 
the Scripture is ambiguous and doubtful without the interpretation 
and testimony of the Church, so that all must flee to the authority 
of the Church and depend upon her for the true sense and meaning 
of the Scriptures. On the other side, some Protestants, fearing 
that some advantage might be given to the Romanists by this con- 
cession, and not considering how the certainty of the Scriptures 
might well be maintained though the Text were unjjointed, instead 
of denying the consequence, which they might well have done, 
thought fit rather to deny the assumption, and to maintain that the 
points Avere of Divine original, whereby they involved themselves 
in extreme labyrinths, engaging themselves in defence of that 
which might be easily proved to be false, and thereby wronged 
the cause which they seemed to defend. Others, therefore, of 
more learning and Jwdp^me?!^ knowing that this j)ositio7i of the divine 
original of the points could not be made good ; and that the truth 
needed not the patronage of an untruth, would not engage them- 
selves therein, but granted it to be true, that the points were in- 
vented by the Rabbins, yet denied the consequence, maintaining, 
notwithstanding, that the reading and sense of the text might be 
certain without punctucUioii, and that therefore the Scriptures did 
not at all depend upon the authority of the Church: and of this 
judgment were the chief Protestant Divines, and greatest linguists 
that then Avere, or have been since in the Christian World, such as 
I named before; Luther, Zwinglius, Calvin, Beza, Musculus, Bren- 
tius, Pellicane, Oecolampadius, Mercer, Piscator, P. Phagius, Dru- 

1 Of the Integrity and Purity of the Hebreiv Text of the Scriptures, vnth Con- 
siderations of the Prolegomena and Appendix to the Late "■ Biblia Folyglotta,'^ 
Oxford, 1659. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 225 

sius, Schindler, Martinius, Scaliger, De Dieu, Casaubon, Erpenius, 
Sixt. Amana, Jac. and Ludov. Capellus, G-rotius, etc. — among our- 
selves, Archbishop Ussher, Bishop Prideaux, Mr. Mead, Mr. Selden, 
and innumerable others, whom I forbear to name, who conceived 
it would nothing disadvantage the cause, to yield that proposition, 
for that they could still make it good, that the Scripture was in 
itself a sufficient and certain rule for faith and life, not depending 
upon any human authority to support it." ^ 

We have quoted this extract at length for the light it casts 
upon the struggle of criticism at the time. John Owen, honoured 
as a preacher and dogmatic writer, but certainly no exegete, 
had spun a theory of inspiration after the a priori scholastic 
method, and with it did battle against the great Polyglot. It 
was a Quixotic attempt, and resulted in ridiculous failure. His 
dogma is crushed as a shell in the grasp of a giant. The in- 
dignation of Walton burns hot against this wanton and un- 
reasoning attack. But he consoled himself with the opening 
reflection that Origen's Hexapla, Jerome's Vulgate, the Com- 
plutensian Polyglot, Erasmus' Greek Testament, the Antwerp 
and Paris Polyglots, had all in turn been assailed by those 
whose theories and dogmas had been threatened or overturned 
by a scholarly induction of facts. 

The theory of the scholastics prevailed but for a brief period 
in Switzerland, where it was overthrown by the reaction under 
the leadership of the younger Turretine. The theory of John 
Owen did not influence the divines who under the authority 
of the British Parliament constructed the Westminster Con- 
fession of Faith : 

" In fact, it was not till several years after the Confession was 
completed, and the star of Owen was in the ascendant, that under 
the spell of a genius and learning only second to Calvin, English 
Puritanism so generally identified itself with what is termed his 
less liberal view." - 

Owen's type of theology w^orked in the doctrine of inspira- 
tion, as well as in other dogmas, to the detriment of the simpler 
and more evangelical Westminster theology ; and in the latter 

1 The Considerator Considered, London, 1659, pp. 220 seq. 

2 Mitchell, Minutes of Westminster Assembly, p. xx. 

Q 



226 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

part of the seventeenth century gave Puritan theology a scho- 
lastic type which it did not possess before. But it did not 
prevent such representative Presbyterians as Matthew Poole, 
Edmund Calamy, and the Cambridge men, with Baxter, from 
taking the more scholarly position. The critics of the Re- 
formed Church produced masterpieces of biblical learning, 
which have been the pride and boast of the Reformed Churches 
to the present. Like Cappellus, they delighted in the name 
critical^ and were not afraid of it. John Pearson, Anton Scat- 
tergood, Henry Gouldman, and Richard Pearson,^ and above all 
Matthew Poole, published critical works of great and abiding 
merit.^ 

III. Textual Criticism in the Eighteenth and 
Nineteenth Centuries 

Biblical Criticism continued in England till the midst 
of the eighteenth century. Mill issued his critical New Tes- 
tament in 1707, the fruit of great industry, and was assailed 
by unthinking men who preferred pious ignorance to a correct 
New Testament.^ But Richard Bentley espoused the cause 
of his friend with invincible arguments, and he himself spent 
many years in the collection of manuscripts. He died leaving 
his magnificent work incomplete, and his plans to be carried 
out by foreign scholars. 

For <^ now original research in the science of Biblical Criticism, 
so far as the New Testament is concerned, seems to have left the 
shores of England to return no more for upwards of a century; 
and we must look to Germany if we wish to trace the further 
progress of investigations which our countrymen had so auspi- 
ciously begun." ^ 

Bishop Lowth did for the Old Testament what Bentley did 
for the New. In his works ^ he called the attention of scholars 
to the necessity of emendation of the Massoretic text, and 

^ Critici Sacri, 9 vols, folio, 1660. 
2 Synopsis Criticorum, 5 vols, folio, 1669. 

8 Scrivener, Introduction to the Criticism of the N. T., 2d ed. 1874, p. 400. 
* Scrivener in I. c. , p. 402. 

^ De Sacra Poesi Hehrceoriim, 1753, and Isaiah: A New Translation, with 
a Preliminary Dissertation and Notes, 1778, 2d ed., 1779. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 227 

encouraged Kennicott to collate the manuscripts of the Old 
Testament, which he did, publishing the result in a monu- 
mental work in 1776-1780.^ This was preceded by an intro- 
ductory work in 1753-1759.2 

Bishop Lowth, with his fine aesthetic sense and insight into 
the principles of Hebrew poetry, saw and stated the truth : 

" If it be asked, what then is the real condition of the present 
Hebrew Text; and of what sort, and in what number, are the 
mistakes which we must acknowledge to be found in it: it is 
answered, that the condition of the Hebrew Text is such, as from 
the nature of the thing, the antiquity of the writings themselves, 
the want of due care, or critical skill (in which latter at least the 
Jews have been exceedingly deficient), might in all reason have 
been expected, that the mistakes are frequent, and of various 
kinds; of letters, words, and sentences; by variation, omission, 
transposition; such as often Injure the beauty and elegance, 
embarrass the construction, alter or obscure the sense, and some- 
times render it quite unintelligible. If it be objected that a 
concession so large as this is, tends to invalidate the authority 
of Scripture; that it gives up in effect the certainty and authen- 
ticity of the doctrines contained in it, and exposes our religion 
naked and defenceless to the assaults of its enemies: this, I think, 
is a vain and groundless apprehension. . . . Important and fun- 
damental doctrines do not wholly depend on single passages ; and 
universal harmony runs through the Holy Scriptures; the parts 
mutually support each other, and supply one another's deficiencies 
and obscurities. Superficial damages and partial defects may 
greatly diminish the beauty of the edifice, without injuring its 
strength and bringing on utter ruin and destruction.^ 

After this splendid beginning, Old Testament criticism fol- 
lowed its New Testament sister to the continent of Europe and 
remained absent until our own day. 

On the continent the work of Mill was carried on by J. A. 
Bengel,^ J. C. Wetstein,^ J. J. Griesbach,^ J. M. A. Scholz,' 

' Vetus Test. Heb. cum var. lectiojiibus, 2 Tom., Oxford. 

2 The State of the Printed Hebrew Text of the Old Testament considered, 
2 vols. 8vo, Oxford. 

3 Lowth, Isaiah, 2d ed., London, 1779, pp. lix., Ix. 

* Prodromus, N.T. Gr., 1725. Novum Test., 1734. 

° Neiv Test. Gr. cum lectionibus variantibus Codicum, etc., Amst., 1751-1752. 

6 SijmbolcB Criticce, 2 Tom., 1785-1793. 

' Bib. krit- Peise Leipzig, 1823; N.T. Greece, 2 Bd., Leipzig, 1830-1836. 



228 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

C. Lachmann,^ culminating in Const. Tischendorf, who edited 
the chief uncial authorities, discovered and edited the Codex 
Sinaiticiis^^ and issued numerous editions of the New Testa- 
ment, the earliest in 1841. He crowned his work with the 
eighth critical edition of the New Testament,^ which he lived 
to complete, but had to leave the prolegomena to an American 
scholar, who succeeded him in his chair at Leipzig and com- 
pleted his work in 1884-1894. 

In the Old Testament, De Rossi carried on the work of 
Kennicott.^ Little has been done since his day until recent 
times, when Baer united with Delitzsch in issuing in parts a 
revised Massoretic text, 1869-1895 ; Hermann Strack exam- 
ined the recently discovered Oriental manuscripts, the chief 
of which is the St. Petersburg codex of the Prophets,^ and 
Frensdorf undertook the production of the Massora Mapia.^ 
Within recent times Textual Criticism has taken strong hold 
again in England. S. P. Tregelles,^ F. H. Scrivener,^ B. F. 
Westcott, and F. J. A. Hort^ have advanced the Textual 
Criticism of the New Testament beyond the mark reached 
by continental scholars. The text of Westcott and Hort has 
become the standard text of the Greek Testament for Great 
Britain and America, and the principles of the Textual Criti- 
cism of the New Testament, as stated by them, are regarded 
as the basis for further advance by most English-speaking 
scholars. In Old Testament criticism England is advancing 
to the front rank. The work of Ginsburg on the Massora ^^ is 

1 Novum Test. Greece et Latine, 2 BcL, Berlin, 1842-1850. 

2 BihUorum Codex Sinaiticus Fetropolitanus, St. Petersburg, 1862 ; Die 
Sinaibibel, Hire Entdeckung , Herausgahe und Erwerbung., Leipzig, 1871. 

2 Novum Testamentum Greece. Editio octava : Critica Major, Lipsiae, 
1869-1872. 

* VaricB lectiones Vet. Test., 4 Tom., Parm., 1784-1788. 

^ Frophetarum Fosteriorum Codex Bahylonicus FetropoUtamis, Petropoli, 
1876. 

6 Die Massora Magna; Erster Theil, Massoretisclies Worterbuch, Hanover 
unci Leipzig, 1876. 

"' The Greek Neio Testament edited from Ancient Authorities, etc., 4to, 18-37- 
1872, pp. 1017. 

8 Flain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, od ed., 1883. 

9 TJie New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. II. Introduction and 
Appendix. N.Y., 1882. 

10 The Massorah compiled from Manuscripts Alphabetically and Lexically 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 229 

the greatest achievement since the unpublished work of Elias 
Levita. And his edition of the Massoretic text of the Old 
Testament will probably ere long supplant all others. 

The Textual Criticism of the Old Testament lagged behind 
the New Testament.^ And the reason of it is, that scholars 
long hesitated to go back of the Massoretic text. 

Keil in Germany for a long time resisted the advance of Text- 
ual Criticism, and in his anxiety to maintain the present Mas- 
soretic text did not hesitate to charge the Septuagint version 
with the carelessness and caprice of transcribers and an uncriti- 
cal and wanton passion for emendation. W. H. Green of 
Princeton and his school represent the same spirit of hostility 
to Textual Criticism in the United States of America. The 
English revisers of the Old Testament placed the results of 
Textual Criticism in the margin of their revision, but the 
American revisers, under the headship of W. H. Green, ob- 
jected to all Textual Criticism whatever, and remonstrated 
against any, even in the margin. More recently Old Testa- 
ment scholars have urged more strongly the application of 
Textual Criticism to the Old Testament. Gratz, the Jewish 
scholar, rightly says that we ought not to speak of a Masso- 
retic text that has been made sure to us, but rather of dif- 
ferent schools of Massorites, and follow their example and 
remove impossible readings from the text.^ 

There can be no doubt, as Robertson Smith states : " It has 
gradually become clear to the vast majority of conscientious 
students that the Septuagint is really of the greatest value as a 
witness to the early state of the text." ^ Bishop Lowth already * 
calls the Massoretic text 

"The Jews' interpretation of the Old Testament." "We do 
not deny the usefulness of this interpretation, nor would we be 
thought to detract from its merits by setting it in this light ; it is 

arranged, YoX^.l. and IL, Aleph-Tav, London, 1880-1883; Vol. III., supple- 
mentary 1885; Vol. IV., promised soon. 

1 Davidson, Treatise of Biblical Criticism, Boston, 1853, I. pp. 160 seq. 

2 Krit. Com. zu den Psalmen nehst Text und Uehersetzung, Breslau, I., 1882, 
pp. 118 seq. 

^ Old Test, in Jeioish Church., p. 86. 

* In his Preliminary Dissert, to Isaiah., 2d ed., London, 1779, p. Iv. 



230 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

perhaps, upon the whole, preferable to any one of the ancient ver- 
sions ; it has probably the great advantage of having been formed 
upon a traditionary explanation of the text and of being generally 
agreeable to that sense of Scripture which passed current and was 
commonly received by the Jewish nation in ancient times : and it 
has certainly been of great service to the moderns in leading them 
into the knowledge of the Hebrew tongue. But they would have 
made a much better use of it, and a greater progress in the expli- 
cation of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, had they consulted 
it, without absolutely submitting to its authority ; had they con- 
sidered it as an assistant, not as an infallible guide." 

Probably few scholars would go so far as this, yet there is a 
strong tendency in that direction. The fact that the New Tes- 
tament does not base its citations upon the original Hebrew 
text in literal quotation, but uses ordinarily the Septuagint 
and sometimes Aramaic Targums with the utmost freedom, 
has ever given trouble to the apologist. Richard Baxter meets 
it in this way : 

" But one instance I more doubt of myself, which is, when 
Christ and his apostles do oft use the Septuagint in their citations 
out of the Old Testament, whether it be alwaies their meaning to 
justifie each translation and particle of sense, as the Word of God 
and rightly done ; or only to use that as tolerable and containing 
the main truth intended which was then in use among the Jews, 
and therefore understood by them ; and so best to the auditors. 
And also whether every citation of number or genealogies from 
the Septuagint, intended an approbation of it in the very points it 
differeth from the Hebrew copies." ^ 

The study of the text of the Old Testament has been ad- 
vanced in recent years by a great number of scholars in Ger- 
many, France, Switzerland, Holland, Austria, Ital}^ Great 
Britain, and America ; scholars of all faiths, Jew and Chris- 
tian, Roman Catholic and Protestant. They have vied with 
one another in this fundamental work of biblical study. It 
has now become practically impossible for an}^ scholarly work 
to be done on the Old Testament without the use of all the 
resources of Textual Criticism for a sure foundation. 

1 More Beasons, 1672, p. 49; see also p. 45. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURjE 231 

IV. The Application of Textual Criticism to Holy 

Scripture 

Biblical Textual Criticism derives from general Textual 
Criticism its principles and methods of work. These differ in 
their application to the Bible only as there are special circum- 
stances connected with the biblical writings that differ from 
those of other writings. As Hort says : 

^' The leading principles of textual criticism are identical for all 
writings whatever. Differences in application arise only from 
differences in the amount, variety, and quality of evidence: no 
method is ever inapplicable except through defectiveness of evi- 
dence." ^ 

V. The Genealogical Principle 

The application of the genealogical principle to the text of 
the Bible results in the following outline of work, so far as 
the Hebrew Bible is concerned. 

1. The first effort must be to ascertain the text of Ben 
Asher of the tenth Christian century. All the Palestinian 
manuscripts known to us, and all the citations in Jewish writers 
since that date, guide to this result. The recent printed texts 
of Baer and Delitzsch and of Ginsburg, although rivals, agree 
in the main in giving this text in a reliable form. 

2. We next have to determine the official text of the 
Sopherim of the second Christian century. Starting with the 
text of Ben Asher, which is the main stock, we have to bring 
into consideration the three streams of Massoretic tradition, 
the Palestinian, the Babylonian, and the Karaite, and trace 
them all back to their common parent. We may thus classify 
the Rabbinical writings from the second to the tenth century 
and arrange them in families and by age, in order to use their 
citations. The most important works to be considered are the 
Talmuds and the Midrashim. 

The most important of the Rabbinical writings are the 
Talmuds, — the Babylonian and the Palestinian. These contain 

1 Westcott and Hort, New Testament in the Original Greek, Introduction^ 
1882, p. 19. 



232 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the traditional interpretation of the Pentateuch in several 
layers. 

(<2) The most important of these is the Mishna^^ codified by 
Rabbi Jehuda, but completed by his immediate disciples. It 
was handed down as a compact body of tradition from the 
close of the second century a.d. but was not committed to 
writing until the rest of the Talmud was completed, in the 
sixth century. 2 

(6) The next in importance are the Baraithoth.^ These are 
external Mishnayoth other than those contained in the code of 
Rabbi Jehuda. These are of uncertain date ; some of them 
older than the Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda, some of them contem- 
porary, some more recent, probably none later than the third 
century. These are cited in the Talmud by the formulas 
*'Our Rabbins teach," "It is taught."* These Baraithoth come 
from private rabbins such as R. Yanai, R. Chiya, Bar Kappara. 
The rabbins Hillel, Shammai, and Akiba made earlier collec- 

^ njt^tt = Sevripua-Ls, repetition of the Law. 

2 This has been published apart in various editions ; e.g. 1 vol. folio, Naples, 
1492 ; Surenhusius, 6 vols, folio, Amsterdam, 1698-1703 ; Jost, 6 thle, Berlin, 
1832-1834 ; Sittenfeld, 6 thle, Berlin, 1863, and others. It is composed of six 
C^-*ia, which are subdivided into 11 + 12 + 7 + 10 + 11 + 12 = 63 tracts. The 
laost famous of these is the Pirqe Aboth, a collection of sentences or sayings 
of the Fathers from the second century e.g. to the second century a.d. 

* SIT'IS, pi. mrT'^D. To distinguish between the Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda 
and all the other elements as Gemara, is incorrect and misleading unless we use 
these terms in a purely formal sense, and distinguish in the Gemara the Mishnaic 
elements from the commentary of the Gemara upon them. Thus Emanuel 
Deutsch, in his Literary Bemains (p. 40) : "Jehuda the ' Redactor ' had excluded 
all but the best authenticated traditions, as well as all discussion and exegesis, 
unless where particularly necessary. The vast mass of these materials was now 
also collected as a sort of apocryphal oral code. We have, dating a few genera- 
tions after the Redaction of the official Mishna., a so-called external Mishna 
(^Baraitha) ; further, the discussions and additions belonging by rights to the 
Mishna called Tosephta (Supplement) ; and finally, the exegesis and methodology 
of the Halacha (Sifri^ Sifra, Mechilta), much of which was afterwards intro- 
duced into the Talmud." So Levy in his Neu Hebraisches und Chaldaisches 
Wbrterhuch (I. 260) defines: " KfT'ia as properly that which is outside of the 
Canon (we must supply bsn'jn^ to Kn'13) ; that is, every Mishna (or Halacha, 
doctrine) which was not taken up into the collection of the Mishna by R. Jehuda 
Hanasi, and many of which collected separately by his later contemporaries are 
contained in different compendiums." See Gratz, Geschichte der Jitden, IV. 
232/. ; Wogue, Histoire de V Exegese Biblique, 1881, p. 185. 

•* One of the most valuable of these is the xn^nn with reference to the order 
of the books of the Old Testament. (See p. 262.) 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 233 

tioiis, but these passed over into the Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda 
and the Baraithoth. The language of the Mishna and Baraitha 
is late Hebrew. 

((?) The third in importance in the Talmuds is the TosepJi- 
toth} or additions. There are fifty-two of these sections, whose 
redaction is also referred to the third century. The language 
of these is Hebrew, but more coloured with Aramaic. ^ 

(d) The Gemara^ is a commentary on the earlier elements 
of the Talmud.* There are two of these which make up the 
two Talmuds, the Babylonian and the Jerusalem. 

The Jerusalem Gemara is the product of the Rabbinical 
school of Tiberias and was codified about 350 a.d. It treats 
of thirty-nine only of the sixty-three tracts of the Mishna. 

The Babylonian Gemara is four times as large as the Jeru- 
salem. It extends over thirty-six and one-h?Jf tracts of the 
Mishna, of which eight and one-half are different from those 
treated in the Jerusalem Gemara. It comes from the Rabbini- 
cal school at Sura on the Euphrates, the founder of which was 
Rab (Abba Areka), a scholar of Rabbi Jehuda. Its compila- 
tion extended from the fifth to the eighth century.^ 

The Gemaras are in Aramaic of the eastern and western 
dialects. Portions of the Babylonian is in Med. Hebrew. 

1 mnsDin, 

2 Thirty-one of these are contained in Ugolino's Thesaurus, translated into 
Latin. 

T T : 

4 Chiarini, Le Talmud 'de Bahylone, 1831, p. 19, go so far as to say : " Les 
Mekiltoth, les Tosaphoth et les Beraitoth ont aussi porte le litre de nVSlTD ou de 
m'!5"tJ nvJITD, parce qu'' elles jouissarent de la meme autorite que la Mischna de 
Juda le Saint, et qu'' elles etaient plus reputees encore que cette derniere des 
cote de Vordre et de la clarte.'''' But they are regarded as apocryphal Mishna- 
yoth by some. But this does not decide their intrinsic value. See also Pressel, 
in Herzog, Eeal Unci/., 1 Aufl., XV. p. 661 ; Gelbhaus, Bahhi Jehuda Hanassi^ 
Wien, 1876, p. 92 ; Schiirer, Lehrb. d. N. T. Zeitgeschichte, p. 42 ; Zunz, Got- 
tesdienstlichen Vortrdge der Juden, Berlin, 1832, pp. 49 seq. 

^ The Jerusalem Talmud was first printed by Bomberg at Venice, folio 
(1522-1523) ; the Babylonian by Bomberg at Venice, 12 vols, folio, in 1520. These 
are scarce and valuable, but are both in the library of the Union Theological 
Seminary, New York. Nineteen tracts of the Jerusalem Gemara and three tracts 
of the Babylonian are in Ugolino. Chiarini began to translate the Talmud into 
French in 1831, but did not get beyond the Berakoth. M. Schwab has trans- 
lated into French the Jerusalem Talmud, 11 vols., Paris, 1871-1890. A German 
translation of the Babylonian Talmud by L. Goldschmidt is now in progress. 



234 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

(e) The Tosaphoth are additional glosses to the Talmud from 
the school of Rashi of the twelfth century. 

The Talmuds contain numerous citations from the Old Tes- 
tament Scriptures. Of earlier date than the Massoretic text, 
they are of great service for purposes of criticism. But criti- 
cal editions of the Talmud are still a desideratum. 

The ilfj(irasAim ^ are expository commentaries on Holy Script- 
ure. The earliest of these belong to the time of the Mishna, 
and are quoted in the Gemaras. They are in Hebrew. The 
later are in Aramaic of different centuries. 

These are : (1) the Mekhilta,'^ upon a portion of Exodus ; (2) the 
Sifra,^ upon Leviticus ; (3) the Sifri,^ upon Numbers and Deuter- 
onomy. Their language is Hebrew ; (4) the Rahhoth,^ a large col- 
lection on the Pentateuch and Megilloth. 

(a) One on Genesis from the sixth century called BeresJiith 
Rahha, also Wayelii Rahha of the twelfth century. 

(5) Shemoth Rahha, on Exodus, eleventh to twelfth century. 

(c) Wayyiqra Rahha, on Leviticus, from middle of seventh cen- 
tury. 

(d) Bemidhar Rahha, on Numbers, from the twelfth century. 

(e) Deharim Rahha, on Deuteronomy, 900 a.d. 

(/) Shir Hashshirim Rahha, on Song of Songs, late in the Middle 
Ages. 

(g) Midrash Kuth, of the late Middle Age. 

(h) Midrash Echa, on Lamentations, of seventh century. 

(i) Midrash Koheleth, of the late Middle Age. 

Ij) Midrash Esther, 940 a.d.« 

(5) The PesiktaJ 

(a) Pesikta of Rab Kahana. These are expositions of the lec- 
tionaries or readings for the synagogue year. They are not ear- 
lier than the latter part of the seventh century a.d.^ 

(6) Pesikta Rahhathi, second half of the ninth century, 
(c) Pesikta Zutarta of R. Tobia, twelfth century. 

1 *yi^n"lp : uJ"n, to study, inquire. 

2 XnS'S!::. Published by J. H. Weiss, Vienna, 1865 ; best edition, Friedmann, 
Vienna, 1870. Latin translation in Ugolino, XIV. 

3 snSD. Published by Weiss, Vienna, 1862. Latin translation in Ugolino, 
XIV. 

* ^IBD. Published by Friedmann, Vienna, 1864. Latin translation in Ugolino, 
XV. 6 ninn i^nnn. 

6 These have been translated into German by Wiinsche in his Bihliotheca 
Rahhinica. "^ Kn,TDa. » Edition by Solomon Buber, Lyck, 1868. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 235 

(6) Pirke^ R. Elieser,' a haggadistic work in fifty-four chapters, 
of the eighth century, upon Pentateuchal history.^ 

(7) Tayichuma : '* Midrash of the Pentateuch of the ninth cen- 
tury. 

{S) Yalqut Shimoni : ^ Midrash of the whole Bible of the first 
half of thirteenth century." 

Three early historical works are of some importance : 

(a) The Megillath Taanith,"* or Roll of Fasts. It is mentioned 
in the Mishna,^ and belongs to the beginning of the second 
century. It is Aramaic in the language of text, but the later 
commentary is in Hebrew of eighth century. 

(h) Seder Olam Habba,^ explanation of biblical history from 
Adam to the rebellion of Bat Cochba. It is cited in the Tal- 
mud, and ascribed to R. Jose ben Chalafta of 160 a.d. It is 
full of later interpolations.^^ 

(<?) The Seder Olam Zutta,^'^ is a genealogical work of the 
eighth century. 

In this body of ancient literature, much of which precedes 
the Massoretic text, we have a mass of citations which are of 
value for the criticism of the old biblical text of the Sopherim. 

Besides these there were a large number of distinguished 
rabbins of the Middle Ages, such as Saadia of the tenth cen- 
tury in Egypt, and his pupil, Isaac Israeli, in North Africa; in 
the eleventh century Chasdai Ibn Shaprut and Samuel ha- 
Nagid, Menahem ben Saruk and Dunash Ibn Labrat, in 
Spain ; in the twelfth century Moses Ibn Ezra, Juda ha-Levi, 
Abraham ben Meir, Ibn Ezra, and, chief of all, Maimonides, 
1135, the most distinguished Jew since Rabbi Jehuda. He 
wrote commentaries on the Mishna in Arabic. ^^ j^is influence 
extended throughout the Jewish and Christian world. 

1 'piS. 2 Baraitha derabbi Elieser. ^ Edition, Warsaw, 1874. 

6 An edition publislied at Wilna, 1876. The Midrash on Zechariah has re- 
cently been translated and published by King, Cambridge, 1882. 

7 n^3i;n rh:^. s Taanith, II. 8. 9 xni nh^v "mo. 

10 An early edition was published at Basel, 1580. The best edition is in 
Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic series, Vol. I. part VI., 1895. ^^ XDIT dSiu "IID. 

12 The Introductions have been published, namely, the Porta Mosis, trans, by 
Pocock, Oxford, 1655 ; Moreh-Nebhiikhim, a treatise of theology and religious 
philosophy, by Buxtorf, Basel, 1629, trans, into English by Friedlander, Lon- 
don, 1885. 



236 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

In Germany was the celebrated Simeon Kara, the author of 
the Yalqut ; in France, Rashi, 1040-1105, contemporary of God- 
frey of Bouillon, wrote a commentary on the Bible ; Samuel 
ben Meir, 1085 ; Joseph Kimchi, at the close of the twelfth 
century, and his most distinguished son, David Kimchi, about 
1200, who wrote commentaries on the Bible, a lexicon, gram- 
mar, etc. 

In the fifteenth century Jewish learning found expression in 
Abravanel, 1437, born at Lisbon, who wrote commentaries on 
the Pentateuch, Proverbs, and Daniel ; Elias Levita, born in 
1471, in Bavaria; Abraham ben Meir, at Lucca, employed by 
Bomberg. The rabbins of the Middle Ages are important 
authorities for determining the Massoretic text. The com- 
mentaries of Rashi and Aben Ezra are printed in the Rabbin- 
ical Bibles on either side of the Massoretic text and Targums. 

In these citations we have help, in the latest to determine 
the correct Massoretic text, and in the earlier to determine 
the correct Taanite text. These citations need a more careful 
examination and comparison than has yet been given to them. 
But the agreement of scholars thus far is to the effect that the 
consonantal text used in the Mishna is essentially our conso- 
nantal text. It was fixed in its present form at the close of the 
second century a.d. 

The versions now come into line. The Arabic version of 
Saadia of the tenth century is valuable for the first step back of 
the text of Ben Asher. The Vulgate version of Jerome gives 
evidence of the text of the Sopherim of the second century. 

3. The next step backwards is to ascertain the Maccabean 
text. The main stock is the official text of the Sopherim of 
the second century. The Aramaic Targums of Onkelos on 
the Law and of Jonathan on the Prophets give evidence in part 
for the text of the first century of the Christian era and possi- 
bly earlier. The Syriac version gives evidence of a Hebrew 
text of the first Christian century. The citations in the New 
Testament from the Aramaic Targums on the Old Testament 
carry us back into the early part of the first century of our 
era. The citations in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, so 
far as they cite from the Hebrew text or Aramaic Targums, 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 237 

give evidence to texts of the first century of our era, and of the 
first and second centuries B.C., according to their dates. The 
most valuable of these is the book of Jubilees, which gives im- 
portant independent evidence as to the Hebrew text of the 
first century B.C. The book of Jubilees has been studied with 
great care by Dillmann and Charles. The latter^ gives twenty- 
five passages in the book of Genesis, where the Massoretic text 
should be corrected by the book of Jubilees, which in these 
instances is sustained by the Samaritan codex or the ancient 
versions. 

There is a large Jewish literature from the first Christian 
century backwards, whose citations are important for the 
determination of the pre-Rabbinical and pre-Christian text. 

(a) The writings of the Hellenists. Josephus was a volumi- 
nous writer. 2 He gives evidence of an early text of the Septu- 
agint, corresponding in the main with the so-called Lucian 
Recension. This has been shown recently by Mez.^ 

Philo, born in 20 B.C., lived till the middle of the first cen- 
tury A.D., and wrote a large number of treatises.^ Ryle has 
recently shown the critical value of his citations.^ 

(6) The apocryphal books. ^ 

Esdras (of the first century B.C.) ; Tobit, Judith, and Wis- 
dom of Solomon (of the second century B.C.) ; Ecclesiasticus 
(of the early second century) ; Baruch (of the first century 
a.d) ; Epistle of Jeremy (ancient). Song of the Three Chil- 
dren, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon ; the four books of Mac- 
cabees (the first from the middle of the first century B.C., 
the second from the early part of the first century A.D., the 



1 Anecdota Oxoniensia. The EtMopic Version of the Hehreio Book of 
Jubilees^ 1895, p. xxiv. 

2 Jewish Antiquities (93-94 a.d.), containing Jewish history from the begin- 
ning; Jewish War (70-80 ? a.d.); Autobiography (100 a.d.); Contra Apionem. 
The best edition of Josephus is Niese, Berlin, 1887-1895, Whiston's translation 
of Antiquities, Traill's of Jewish War. 

3 See p. 203. 

4 Mangey, 2 vols, folio, London, 1742. Hand-edition by Richter, 8 vols. 
Leipzig, 1828-1830, translated into English, Bohn's Library. New Greek edi- 
tion by Cohn, Berlin, 1896. 

5 Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, 1895. 

6 See Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 4 seq. 



238 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

third from late in the first century A.D., the fourth also from 
the first century A.D.). 

((?) The Pseudepigraphs are of a very large number : The 
Psalter of Solomon was originally written in Hebrew in the 
latter part of the first century B.C., but is preserved in Greek. 
The book of Enoch, originally written in Hebrew, is pre- 
served entire only in JEthiopic. The Assumption of Moses is 
from the first Christian century. Fourth Ezra is from early in 
the second century A.D. The Apocalypse of Baruch, recently 
found in the Ambrosian Library at Milan by Ceriani, is from the 
early second century A.D. The Ascension of Isaiah is from 
the second half of the second century B.C. The Testament of 
the Twelve Patriarchs is from the early part of the second cen- 
tury. The book of Jubilees, or Little Genesis, is from the first 
century B.C. The Sibylline Oracles are in fourteen books, from 
the second century B.C. to the close of the first century A.D.^ 

4. The next step in Textual Criticism is to ascertain the 
original autographs of the Canon of the Law and the Prophets, 
when they were first collected and fixed. The Septuagint 
version of the Law and the Prophets, and possibly also of 
some of the Writings, takes us back of the Maccabean text. 
The Samaritan codex of the Law gives us on the whole the 
earliest independent witness to the original text of the Canon 
of the Law. 

5. We have as a final step to ascertain the original text, the 
autographs of the authors of the Sacred Writings. This we 
can ascertain on the basis of the texts thus far established, by 
bringing into consideration parallel passages, such as those of 
Samuel and Kings on the one side and Chronicles on the other ; 
parallel versions of the same poem, as Ps. 14 = 53 ; Ps. 18 = 
2 Sam. 22 ; citations of earlier writings in later ones ; and 
the rules of internal evidence. 

The following examples of the application of the genealogical 
principles to particular passages will suffice: 

The English Authorized Version reads in Gen. 49^" "until 
Shiloh come." The Eevised Version retains this in the text, 

1 See Briggs, Ifessiah of the Gospels, pp. 9 seq. ; and Messiah of the Apostles, 
pp. 2 seq. 



TEXTUAL CKITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 239 

but puts on the marghi other renderings. The Massoretic text, 
nb^*^ ^52^ ^3 ^V, may be translated in this way. 

(a) But the first appearance of this translation known to us is 
by Sebastian Mtinster in 1534. Through his influence it passed 
over into the Great Bible in 1539, and has been retained in all 
subsequent English versions. Munster seems to have been mis- 
led to this interpretation by the use of HTtT as a name of the 
Messiah in the Talmud.^ But that does not justify the trans- 
lation " until Shiloh come " any more than the use of Yinnon, 
Ps. 72^^, Chaninah, Jer, 16^^, Menachem, Lam. 1^*^, and the leprous 
one, Is. 53"^, as names of the Messiah, would justify a translation 
of all these passages in accordance therewith. In fact there is no 
such translation of Gen. 49^^ known to Jewish tradition, ii^'^t^ is 
found in the Old Testament as the name of a place, but nowhere 
as the name of a person. 

(5) The Massoretic pointing Tih*^'^ really represents the tradi- 
tional opinion that ^''tT was a noun with the archaic suffix, mean- 
ing his son. This is the interpretation of the Targum Yerushalmi 
and many Jewish scholars of the tenth century. It is true that 
there is no such word in Biblical Hebrew. But the Mishna uses 
the form '^^^tT with the meaning embryo, and it would seem that 
the ancient Jews interpreted h^^ as a cognate stem with ^btT. 
Calvin followed this opinion, but few others have adopted it since 
the E-eformation. 

(c) The '' is of the nature of a Massoretic interpretation, as is so 
frequently the case with the quiescent letters in the Hebrew text. 
The original consonantal text read hS^. This is evident from 
the Arabic of Saadia of the tenth century, who did not follow the 
Massoretic pointing, but translated it as if it were pointed fhx^ ; 
that is, the relative "'^, the preposition 7, and the suffix Ji. 
Saadia is sustained by Aquila, who testifies to the official inter- 
pretation of the rabbins of the second Christian century. Sym- 
machus and Theodotion give the same witness. Jerome read 
n^U? or n^tl?, but he interpreted it as H?!^ = one sent, qui mitten- 
dus est. 

(d) We may now go back of the official text of the second 
Christian century to the Maccabean text. The Targum of 
Onkelos and the Syriac version testify to HbtT, and translate : 
the Targum, " whose is the kingdom," the Syriac, " whose it is," 
which is explained by Aphraates and Ephraem as "whose is the 
kingdom." 

(e) We may now go back to the text of Ezra. The ancient 

1 Sank., 98 b. See Driver, Journal of Philology, 1885, in an article on nb''tC. 



240 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Greek version and the Samaritan codex both confirm T\h^, and 
the former renders eco? av eXOrj to, dTroKecjueva avrS. 

if) ^^^^ ^^^y ^^s^ S^ ^ s^®P s^^^^ further backward under the 
guidance of an apparent citation in Ezek. 21^'\ where the phrase 
tOStr^n l'^ 1^^ J<D IV seems to be not oaly a reminiscence 
but an interpretation of Gen. 49^°, and confirms nT\D with the 
interpretation )^ ^'d^i^. 

Thus the genealogical principle establishes, beyond the shadow 
of a doubt, that the original reading of the passage was H^'^, and 
that the interpretation Avas either " that which belongs to him," 
or " whose it is." 

For another example we may use Ps. 22^° (^), which is translated 
in our English Bible, " Thou didst make me trust (when I was) 
upon my mother's breasts." This is a correct translation of the 
Massoretic text ^tT'tOD^ (Hiphil participle). But in the time of 
Jerome the unpointed text was TltODD, for he takes it as the noun 
TltOD^, my trust. So do the Syriac and ancient Greek versions, 
leading us back to the Maccabean Psalter. But we may go fur- 
ther back still, for Ps. 22^" is quoted in paraphrase in the later 
Ps. 71^, where we have TltOD^, the noun. 

The genealogy of the Greek Bible is traced back in a similar 
way. Lagarde represented that in the case of the Septuagint 
it was necessary to ascertain the three great official texts of the 
third century, Lucian, Hesychius, and Eusebius. All the man- 
uscripts should be classified so far as possible to show their de- 
scent from these. On the basis of these three one may work 
back to the common parent. Westcott and Hort have shown 
that we have two groups of texts that are older than these re- 
censions ; namely (1) the Western text, represented by D, the 
old Latin, the old Syrian, and sundry citations ; and (2) the 
7ieutral text of B, X, going back to a common parent in the second 
century. The translations all come into evidence in showing 
the texts from which they were translated, and the Christian 
Fathers of the different centuries in the use of the versions and 
manuscripts from which they cited. ^ 

An interesting example of the use of the genealogical principle 
in the New Testament is in 1 Peter 3 ^^. The Authorized Version 

1 1 think it unnecessary to give a classification of the Fathers for the purpose 
of shosving the descent of citations. These are accessible easily to all students. 
I have given the Jewish Literature because it is not so accessible. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 241 

reads : " But sanctify tlie Lord God in your hearts." But this 
reading is found only in the uncials of the ninth century, K, L, P, 
and in no earlier writers than Theophylact and CEcumenius. The 
great uncials, B, ^5 and A, C, the Syriac, Sahidic, Coptic, and Armen- 
ian versions, — all give Xpia-Tov, Christ, in place of Oeov, God. The 
genealogical principle therefore determines, without doubt, the 
original reading, and so the Eevised Version renders, " But sanc- 
tify in your hearts Christ as Lord." This evidence might be 
fortified by the usage of the New Testament. But no further 
evidence is needed. 

The genealogical method does not always determine the origi- 
nal reading ; then we have to fall back on the internal evidence. 
As an example of the failure of the genealogical method I may 
cite the case of Acts 20-^ I shall quote from myself : 

" There is a great difference of opinion as to the reading here. 
The external authority of MSS., versions, and citations is not de- 
cisive. Tischendorf, De Wette, Meyer, and the mass of German 
critics read ' Church of the Lord ' ; Scrivener, Westcott, and 
Hort, and the leading British scholars read ' Church of God.' If 
any unprejudiced man will compare the great mass of authorities 
cited on both sides, he will be convinced that there is ample room 
for difference of opinion. The context favors ^Church of the 
Lord.' This reading is also favored by the fact that it is a unique 
reading, and therefore difficult. Nowhere else in the New Testa- 
ment do we find the phrase ' Church of the Lord.' The scribe in 
doubt would follow the usual phrase. That the more difficult 
reading has survived is a proof of its originality. The reading 
' Church of God ' gives by implication ' blood of God.' This is 
found in Ignatius and other early writers, possibly on the basis of 
this passage, but it involves a conception which is alien to the 
New Testament. It is extremely improbable that Luke would 
put into the mouth of Paul such an unexampled and extraordinary 
expression 'under the circumstances. It involved a doctrine of 
startling consequences. Such a doctrine would not come into the 
language of Holy Scripture in such an incidental way. The 
American Eevision, therefore, is to be followed in its reading 
' Church of the Lord ' rather than the A. Y. or the British Revision 
' Church of God.' " ^ 

iBriggs, The Messiah of the Apostles., 1895, p. 81. See Ezra Abbot, Critical 
Essays, pp. 294 seq. 



242 STUDY or holy sckiptuee 



VI. Conflation and other Corruptions 

It is characteristic of the late Syrian texts, and in a large 
measure also of Lucian's text of the Old Testament, that they 
indulge in a considerable amount of conflation. Underlying 
conflation is the feeling that, as far as possible, all of the original 
text should be preserved ; and that, in cases of doubt, it is 
better to preserve all than to run the risk of losing anything. 
Conflation is indeed found in the earliest texts both of the Old 
Testament and the New Testament, and must have taken place 
to a considerable extent back of any versions known to us. 
Conflation arises partly from the comparison of earlier authori- 
ties, and partly from the insertion of ancient marginal explana- 
tions, or glosses. A very good example of conflation is given 
in Westcott and Hort. 

"Mk. 9^1 

" (a) ttSs yap Tvvpl dXto-^Tycrerat (i^) B LA 1 — 118-209 61 81 435 aH 
me. codd. the arm. codd. 

" (/8) TTacra yap Ova-ta dXl dXicrOrjarer at D CU^ (a) 6 cff-i (k) tol holm 
gig {a c tol holm gig omit aXt : a omits yap : k has words appar- 
ently implying the Greek original iraa-a 8e (or yap) ova-ca avaXoiOrj' 
crerai, o being read for 6, and \Nb,ALU for \Al\AlC). 

" (8) Tra? yap Trvpl dXL(T$TJa€TaL, kol Tratra Ovaia a/\t dXi(JU'iqcr€TaL, 

ACNXEFGHKMSUVnr cu. omn. exc. 15 fq vg syr. vg hi me. 
codd aeth arm. codd go Vict (cu^° vg. codd. opt omit dXi ; X adds 
it after Trvpt). 

"A reminiscence of Lev. vii. 13 {koI -n-dv Stopov Ova-ia^ ifxtov dXl 
dAto-^rJo-erat) has created (3 out of a, TTYPIKAIC0 being read as 
0YC! \^A/\AIC0 with a natural reduplication, lost again in some 
Latin copies. The change would be aided by the words that 
follow here, KaAov to aAa? k.t.X. In 8 the two incongruous alterna- 
tives are simply added together, yap being replaced by ku. Besides 
AC NX, 8 has at least the Vulgate Syriac, and the Italian and Vul- 
gate Latin, as well as later versions." ^ 

Here we see the original in the neutral text, a variation by a 
mistake in the Western text, and then a full conflation in the 
Syrian texts. 

An interesting example of corruption of an original text is pre- 
sented in Ps. 25. This Psalm is an alphabetical hexameter. All 

^ Westcott and Hort's New Testament in Greek, 1882, pp. 101, 102. 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 243 

tlie letters of the Hebrew alphabet from ^ to D are represented 
except 3, 1, and p. But it is quite easy to restore these. The line 
with n is restored by making the preceding verse close with ^'^'^^5. 
The measure requires this change also. The line beginning with 
1 is restored by transposing '^n^T'l to the second clause before 
^DM^. A prosaic copyist has combined two lines of poetry into a 
single prose sentence. The line with p has been lost by a slip of 
the eye causing a repetition of H^^^H of the next line. Change 
n5<"l to nip, and the line is restored. 

Examples of dittographj^ are Ps. 67^ and 118^^^'^^^ 

In Ps. 67^ C^'^bi^ lilDlD^ is a mere repetition of the first two 
words of the preceding line. The Psalm is composed of three 
trimeter pentastichs. This dittography destroys the measure of 
the last line by just these two words. 

There are two examples in Ps. 118 : verse 12 b repeated from the 
preceding line, and verse 15 6 by a slip of the eye to the following 
line. In both cases they destroy the measures of the lines. They 
are but half lines, and, if counted, would destroy the symmetry of 
the strophes of the Psalm, which are composed uniformly of seven 
hexameters. 

Examples of the wrong separation of words are : 

(a) Ps. 68'': tTlpD '^ro DH should be tTlpS "^rO^ «D. It is 
a citation from Deut. SS^: i^D ^rD):: mn\ 

(6) Ps. 11^ : niS:r DSnn should be niS:2i 1M "in as Sept., Aq., 
Jer., Syr., Targ. 

The letter ^ has been overlooked by an ancient scribe of the 
Massoretic text of Ps. 140^^, and so we have IDtT'' instead of 
the correct V^DtT^ of the Sept. 

The particle ^D has been omitted in the Massoretic text of Ps. 
143^, and so the assonance mth vss. S*"' *, 10* has been lost. The 
''D is preserved in 6tl of Sept. The final D of ^^^ in Ps. 144^ has 
been overlooked; hence the pointing ^/^^ : but U^t^V is sustained 
by Aq., Jer., Sept. Targ., as well as by the original from which 
the citation was made, Ps. 18**^ = 2 Sam. 22*1 

Ps. 31^ presents an interesting example of a tetrastich, rhyming 
in ^3_, which has been obscured in the Massoretic text but can 
easily be restored. It is cited in the later Psalm, 71H In both 
Psalms there has been a transposition of ^npHiCD, which begins 
the second verse of Ps. 71, but which with the following ^JtO'^S 
closes the second verse of Ps. 31. It should begin the second 
verse, and the first verse should close with ''JtDT'S. Ps. 71 has 
changed the imperative to a jussive, and substituted ''JT'^^D, and 
then by conflation added ''JtO'^'Sm. The second line of Ps. 31 



244 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

proper closes with ^:b^^n H'nn^. In Ps. 71 ^3!?^U?im has taken 
its place by a slip of the eye to the close of the following line, 
and so ^J7"'2in niH^ has been left out. In the third line Ps. 31 
is entirely correct. But Ps. 71 in the Massoretic text has misread 
r\M:ir^rahr:t2 as m^ni^nnbi:?)^ in the ancient unpointed con- 
tinuous text. Apart from the quiescent letters the only difference 
is a mistake of 1 for i and a transposition of ^ and ^. But Sept., 
Sym., Targ., and some Hebrew manuscripts read ))^t2 here, although 
Jerome and the Syriac follow the present text. So Sept. reads els 
TOTTov oxvpov here, but Sym., Jerome, Syr., and Targum agree with 
the Massoretic text. It is altogether probable, therefore, that in 
the Maccabean Hebrew text Ps. 71 agreed with the original Ps. 
31. The corruption of the text was later. In the fourth line 
Ps. 31 is correct, except that a final ^^Sn^m has been added by 
conflation, TTIJ being a variation of nPll The second half of the 
line is not given in Ps. 71. 

The original words of Jesus in the Logia maybe discerned from 
the use of Textual Criticism of the several citations in the Gospels 
and elsewhere. Jesus said : " A prophet is not without honour, 
save in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own 
house.'' (Mk. 6\) This is given in Mt. 13^' : "A prophet is not 
without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house." 
Lk. 4^^^ has : '' Doubtless ye will say unto me this parable. Phy- 
sician, heal thyself; whatsoever we have heard done at Caper- 
naum, do also here in thine own country." John 4"" gives it in the 
form, " Jesus himself testified that a prophet hath no honour in 
his own country." A study of these citations makes it plain that 
the original saying of Jesus did not include " and among his own 
kin, and in his own house." That is an enlargement of the ori- 
ginal words " in his own country," given in Luke and John. This 
is confirmed by the recently discovered Logia of Jesus, from an 
early Greek papyrus. The fifth of these has ovk €(ttlv SeKTos irpo^rjT-qs 
kv Trj TrarptSt avrov, which is very close to Luke's ovSeis -rrpocfiyJTrjS Sektos 
QUTLv €v Trj TrarpiSt avrov. 

This line has an additional line in parallelism with it in this 
fifth logion, namely : ovh\ larpos -ttolu 0epa7retas as tovs ytvwo-Kovras 
avTov. This makes with the other a couplet. In all probability, 
this presents the original couplet of Jesus, which is preserved 
only in the single line of the Gospels, for it is contrary to the 
usages of Hebrew Wisdom to use single lines, or a form of poetry 
of less than a couplet. Single lines of Wisdom do not exist except 
as fragments of groups of lines. Furthermore, this second line is 
suggested by the context of Luke. The original couplet is : 



TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 245 

A prophet is not acceptable in his own country ; 

Neither doth a physician work cures upon them that know him. 

By a careful, accurate, and thorough-going use of the scien- 
tific methods and principles of Textual Criticism, the traditional 
texts upon which the earlier scholars relied have been purified, 
and we may, with considerable confidence, determine, to a great 
extent, very ancient forms of the text quite near to the original 
autographs of the final editors of the biblical writings, and in 
not a few cases we may determine with reasonable accuracy 
the autographs of the authors themselves. We may be encour- 
aged by the advance in the science of Textual Criticism to look 
for greater productivity and fruitfulness in the future. 



CHAPTER XI 

HISTORY OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

We have seen in previous chapters that there was a great 
critical revival at the Reformation ; that the Biblical Criticism 
of the Protestant Reformers was based on the formal principle 
of Protestantism, the divine authority of Holy Scripture over 
against tradition ; that the voice of God Himself, speaking 
to His people through His Word, was the great test ; that 
the Protestant Reformers tested the traditional theory of the 
Canon and eliminated the apocryphal books therefrom ; that 
they rejected the Septuagint and Vulgate versions as the ulti- 
mate appeal, and resorted to the original Greek and Hebrew 
texts ; that they tested the Massoretic traditional pointing of 
the Hebrew Scriptures, and, rejecting it as merely traditional, 
resorted to the original unpointed text ; that they tested the 
traditional manifold sense and allegorical method of interpre- 
tation, and, rejecting these, followed the plain grammatical 
sense, interpreting difficult and obscure passages by the mind 
of the Spirit in passages that are plain and undisputed. 

We have also studied the second critical revival under the 
lead of Cappellus and Walton, and their conflict with the 
Protestant scholastics who had reacted from the critical princi- 
ples of the Reformation into a reliance upon Rabbinical tra- 
dition. We have seen that the Puritan divines still held the 
position of the Protestant Reformers, and were not in accord 
Avith the scholastics. We have now to trace a third critical 
revival, which began toward the close of the eighteenth century 
in the investigations of the poetic and literary features of the 
Old Testament by Bishop Lowth in England and the poet 
Herder in Germany, and of the structure of Genesis by the 
physician Astruc in France. The first critical revival had 

246 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 247 

been mainly devoted to the Canon of Scripture, its authority 
and interpretation. The second critical revival had studied 
the original texts and versions. The third critical revival gave 
attention to the Sacred Scriptures as literature. 

I. The Higher Criticism in the Sixteenth and Seven- 
teenth Centuries. 

Little attention had been given to the literary features of 
the Bible in the sixteenth century. We may infer how the 
Reformers would have met these questions from their freedom 
with regard to traditional views in the few cases in which they 
expressed themselves. Luther denied the Apocalypse to John 
and Ecclesiastes to Solomon. He maintained that the Epistle 
of James was not an apostolic writing. He regarded Jude as 
an extract from 2 Peter, and said, What matters it if Moses 
should not himself have written the Pentateuch ? ^ He thought 
the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by a disciple of the 
apostle Paul, who was a learned man, and made the epistle as 
a sort of a composite piece in which there are some things hard 
to be reconciled with the Gospel. Calvin denied the Pauline 
authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews and doubted the 
Petrine authorship of 2 Peter. He taught that Ezra or some 
one else edited the Psalter and made the first Psalm an intro- 
duction to the collection, not hesitating to oppose the tra- 
ditional view that David was the author or editor of the entire 
Psalter. He also regarded. Ezra as the author of the prophecy 
of Malachi — Malachi being his surname. He furthermore 
constructed, after the model of a harmony of the Gospels, a 
harmony of the pentateuchal legislation about the Ten Com- 
mandments as a centre, holding that all the rest of the com- 
mandments were mere " appendages, which add not the smallest 
completeness to the Law." ^ 

1 See Diestel, Gesch. des Alten Test, in der christlichen Kirche, 1869, pp. 250 
seq. ; and Vorreden in Walch edit, of Luther's Werken., XIV. pp. 35, 146-153 ; 
Tischreden, I. p. 28. 

2 "Therefore, God protests that He never enjoined anything with respect to 
sacrifices ; and He pronounces all external rites but vain and trifling if the very 
least value be assigned to them apart from the Ten Commandments. Whence 
we more certainly arrive at the conclusion to which I have adverted, viz. that 



248 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Zwingli, (Ecolampadius, and other Reformers took similar 
positions. These questions of authorship and date troubled 
the Reformers but little ; they had to battle against the Vul- 
gate for the original text and popular versions, and for a 
simple grammatical exegesis over against traditional authority 
and the manifold sense. Hence it is that on these literary 
questions the Apologies, Articles of Religion, and Confessions 
of Faith in the time of the Reformation take no position what- 
ever, except to lay stress upon the sublimity of the style, the 
unity and the harmony of Scripture, and the internal evidence 
of its inspiration and authority. Calvin sets the example for 
the Reformed Churches in this particular in his Institutes^ and 
is followed by Thomas Cartwright, Archbishop Usher, and 
other eminent Calvinists. 

The Westminster Confession of Faith is in entire accord 
with the other Reformed confessions, and with the well- 
established principles of the Reformation. It expresses a de- 
vout admiration and profound reverence for the holy majestic 
character and style of the Divine Word, but does not define 
* the human authors and the dates of the various writings. As 
A. F. Mitchell says : 

" Any one who will take the trouble t© compare their list of the 
canonical books with that given in the Belgian Confession or the 
Irish articles, may satisfy himself that they held with Dr. Jameson 
that the authority of these books does not depend on the fact 
whether this prophet or that wrote a particular book or parts of a 
book, whether a certain portion was derived from the Elohist or 
the Jehovist, whether Moses wrote the close of Deuteronomy, 
Solomon was the author of Ecclesiastes, or Paul of the Epistle to 
the Hebrews, but the fact that a prophet, an inspired man, wrote 
them, and that they bear the stamp and impress of a divine 
origin." ^ 

they are not, to speak correctly, of the substance of the Law, nor avail of them- 
selves in the worship of God, nor are required by the Lawgiver himself as neces- 
sary, or even as useful, unless they sink into this inferior position. In tine, they 
are appendages which add not the smallest completeness to the Law, but whose 
object is to retain the pious in the spiritual worship of God, which consists of 
Faith and Repentance, of Praises whereby their gratitude is proclaimed, and 
even of the endurance of the cross." — Preface to Harmony of the Four Last 
Books of the Pentateuch. 

1 3Iinutes of the Sessions of the Westminster Assembly of Divines, November, 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 249 

And Matthew Poole, the great Presbyterian critic of the 
seventeenth century, quotes with approval the following from 
the Roman Catholic, Melchior Canus : 

" It is not much material to the Catholick Paith that any book 
was written by this or that author, so long as the Spirit of God is 
believed to be the author of it ; which Gregory delivers and 
explains : For it matters not with what pen the King writes his 
letter, if it be true that he writ it." ^ 

Andrew Rivetus, one of the chief Reformed divines of the 
continent,^ after discussing the various views of the authorship 
of the Psalms, says : 

" This only is to be held as certain, whether David or Moses or 
any other composed the psalms, they themselves were as pens, 
but the Holy Spirit wrote through them : But it is not necessary 
to trouble ourselves about the pen when the true author is 
established." 

In his Introduction to the Sacred Scriptures,^ he enters into 
no discussion of the literary questions. This omission makes it 
clear that these questions did not concern the men of his times. 
Until toward the close of the seventeenth century, those who, 
in the brief preliminary words to their commentaries on the 
different books of Scripture, took the trouble to mention the 
authors and dates of writings, either followed the traditional 
views without criticism or deviated from them in entire uncon- 
sciousness of giving offence to the orthodox faith. This faith 
was firmly fixed on the divine author of Scripture, and they 
felt little concern for the human authors employed. One looks 
in vain in the commentaries of this period for a critical dis- 
cussion of literary questions.* 

1644 to March, 1649, edited by A. F. Mitchell and J. Struthers, Edin., 1874, 
p. xlix. 

1 Blow at the Boot, 4th ed., 1671, p. 228. 

2 In his Prolog, to his Com. on the Psalms. 

^ Isagoge seu Introductio generalis ad scripturam sacram, 1627. 

'^ As specimens the following from the Assembly'' s Annotations may suffice, 
(1) Francis Taylor on Job: "Though most excellent and glorious things be 
contained in it, yet they seem to partake the same portion with their subject ; 
being (as his prosperity was) clouded often with much darkness and obscurity, 
and that not only in those things which are of lesse moment and edification 



250 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The literary questions opened by Lowth, Herder, and Astruc 
were essentially neiv questions. The revived attention to clas- 
sical and Oriental history and literature carried with it a fresh 
study of Hebrew history and literature. The battle of the 
books waged between Bentley and Boyle, which was decided 
in the interests of literary criticism by the masterpiece of 
Bentley,^ was the prelude of a struggle over all the literary 
monuments of antiquity, in which the spurious was to be sepa- 
rated from the genuine. It was indispensable that the Greek 
and Latin and Hebrew literature should pass through the fires 
of this literary and historical criticism, which soon received the 
name of Higher Criticism. As Eichhorn says : 

(viz. the Time and Place and Penman, etc.), but in points of higher doctrine 
and concernment. The Book is observed to be a sort of holy poem, but yet not 
a Fable ; and, though we cannot expressly'- conclude v/hen or by w^hom it was 
written, though our maps cannot show us what Uz was, or where situate, yet 
cannot this Scripture of Job be rejected until Atheisme grow as desperate as 
his wife was, and resolve with her to curse God and dye." The traditional 
view that Moses wrote Job is simply abandoned and the authorship left unknown. 
(2) Casaubon, Preface to the Psalms: "The author of this book (the immedi- 
ate and secondary, we mean, besides the original and general of all true Script- 
ure, the Holy Ghost . . .), though named in some other places of Scripture 
David, as Lk. 20^^^ and elsewhere, is not here in the title of the book expressed. 
The truth is, they are not all David's Psalms, some having been made before 
and some long after him, as shall be shown in due place." The traditional view 
as to the Davidic authorship of the Psalter is abandoned without hesitation or 
apology. (3) Francis Taylor, Preface to the Proverbs: "That Solomon is the 
author of this book of Proverbs in general is generally acknowledged ; but the 
author, as David of the Psalms, not because all made by him, but because either 
the maker of a good part, or collector and approver of the rest. It is not to be 
doubted but that many of these Proverbs and sentences were known and used 
long before Solomon. ... Of them that were collected by others as Solomon's, 
but long since his death, from Chapters 25-30, and then of those that bear 
Agur's name, 30, and Lemuel's, 31. . . . If not all Solomon's, then, but partly 
his and partly collected by him and partly by others at several times, no wonder 
if diverse things, with little or no alteration, be often repeated." 

Joseph Mede (Works, II. pp. 963, 1022, London, 1664), Henry Hammond 
(Paraphrase and Annotations upon the New Testament, London, 1871, p. 135), 
Kidder (^Demonstration of the Messias, London, 1726, II. p. 76), and others 
denied the integrity of Zechariah, and, on the ground of Mt. 27^, ascribed the 
last six chapters to Jeremiah. The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was 
questioned by Carlstadt (De Script. Canon, 1521, § 85), who left the author 
undetermined. The Roman Catholic scholar, Masius (Com. in Josh., 1574, 
Prcef, p. 2, and Chapters 10^3, 19*7; Critica Sacr., 11. p. 1892, London, 1660), 
and the British philosopher, Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651, part III. c. 33) distin- 
guished between Mosaic originals and our present Pentateuch. 

1 Epistles of Phalaris and Fables of ^sop, 1699 ; see Chap. IV. p. 107. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 251 

" Already long ago scholars have sought to determine the age of 
anonymous Greek and Roman writings now from their contents, 
and then since these are often insufficient for an investigation 
of this kind, from their language. They have also by the same 
means separated from ancient works pieces of later origin, which, 
by accidental circumstances, have become mingled with the ancient 
pieces. And not until the writings of the Old Testament have been 
subjected to the same test can any one assert with confidence that 
the sections of a book all belong in reality to the author whose name 
is prefixed." ^ 

The traditional views of the Old Testament literature, as 
fixed in the Talmud and stated in the Christian Fathers, came 
down as a body of lore to be investigated and tested by the 
principles of this Higher Criticism. There were four ways of 
meeting the issue : (1) By attacking the traditional theories 
with the weapons of the Higher Criticism and testing them at 
all points, dealing with the Scriptures as with all other writings 
of antiquity. (2) By defending the traditional theories as the 
established faith of the Church on the ground of the authority 
of tradition, as Buxtorf and Owen had defended the inspira- 
tion of the Hebrew vowel points against Cappellus and Walton. 
(3) By ignoring these questions as matters of scholarship and 
not of faith, and resting on the divine authority of the writings 
themselves. In point of fact, these three methods were pur- 
sued, and three parties ranged themselves in line to meet the 
issues, — the deistic or rationalistic, the traditional or scholastic, 
the pietistic or mystical, — and the battle of the ages between 
these tendencies was renewed on this line. There was a fourth 
and better way which few pursued : (1) inquire what the 
Scriptures teach about themselves, and separate this divine 
authority from all other authority ; (2) apply the principles of 
the Higher Criticism to decide questions not decided by divine 
authority ; (3) let tradition have its voice so far as possible in 
questions not settled by the previous methods. 

1 Mnleit. III. p. 67. 



252 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



II. The Rabbinical Theories 

The most ancient Rabbinical theory of the Old Testament 
literature known to us is contained in the tract Baha Bathra of 
the Talmud. In this passage we have to distinguish the Bar- 
aitha from the Gremara^ 

Bakaitha. — The rabbins have taught that the order of the 
Prophets is, Joshua and Judges, Samuel and Kings, Jeremiah 
and Ezekiel, Isaiah and the Twelve (minor prophets). 

Gemara. — (Question) : How is it ? Hosea is first because it is 
written, "In the beginning the Lord spake to Hosea." But how 
did he speak in the beginning with Hosea ? Have there not been 
so many prophets from Moses unto Hosea ? Rabbi Jochanan said 
that he was the first of the four prophets who prophesied in the 
same period, and these are : Hosea, Isaiah, Amos, and Micah. 
Should then Hosea be placed before at the head ? {Reply) : No, 
since his prophecies had been written alongside of Haggai, Zecha- 
riah, and Malachi, and Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were the 
last of the prophets, it was counted with them. (Question): Ought 
it to have been written apart and ought it to have been placed 
before ? (Reply) : No ; since it was little and might be easily lost. 
(Question) : How is it ? Isaiah was before Jeremiah and Ezekiel. 
Ought Isaiah to be placed before at the head ? (Reply) : Since the 
book of Kings ends in ruin and Jeremiah is, all of it, ruin, and 
Ezekiel has its beginning ruin and its end comfort, and Isaiah is 
all of it comfort; we join ruin to ruin and comfort to comfort. 

Baraitha. — The order of the Writings is, Ruth and the book 
of Psalms, and Job, and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs and 
Lamentations, Daniel and the roll of Esther, Ezra and Chronicles. 

Gemara. — (Question) : But according to the Tanaite who said 
Job was ia the days of Moses, ought Job to be placed before at 
the head ? (Reply) : We begin not with afflictions. (Question) : 
Ruth has also afflictions ? (Reply) : But afflictions which have an 
end. As Rabbi Jochanan says. Why was her name called Ruth ? 
Because David went forth from her who refreshed the Holy One, 
blessed be He ! with songs and praises. 

Baraitha. — And who wrote them? Moses wrote his book, 
the section of Balaam and Job ; Joshua wrote his book and the 

1 JBaba Bathra^ folio 14 6. See pp. 232, 233. I follow the editio princeps^ 
12 vols, folio, Venitia, Bomberg, 1520, but have also consulted the edition pub- 
lished at Berlin and Frankfort-on-the-Oder by Jablonsky, 1736, which follows 
the Basle edition in expurgating the anti-Christian passages. Both of these are 
in the library of the Union Theological Seminary, N.Y. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 253 

eight verses of the law ; Samuel wrote his book and Judges and 
Euth ; David wrote the book of Psalms with the aid of the ten 
ancients, with the aid of Adam the first, Melchizedek, Abraham, 
Moses, Heman, Jeduthun, Asaph, the three sons of Korah ; Jere- 
miah wrote his book, the books of Kings and Lamentations ; 
Hezekiah and his company wrote Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, 
and Ecclesiastes, whose sign is ptTD"^ ; ^ the men of the great syna- 
gogue wrote Ezekiel and the Twelve (minor prophets), Daniel and 
the roll of Esther, whose sign is 513p ; Ezra wrote his book and 
the genealogy of Chronicles unto himself. 

Gemara. — This will support Eab, for Eabbi Jehuda told that 
Eab said : Ezra went not up from Babylon until he had registered 
his own genealogy, then he went up. (Question) : And who finished 
it (his book) ? (Reply) : Nehemiah, son of Hachaliah. The 
author (of the Baraitha) said Joshua wrote his book and the eight 
verses of the law ; this is taught according to him who says of the 
eight verses of the law, Joshua wrote them. Eor it is taught: 
And Moses the servant of the Lord died there. How is it possible 
that Moses died and wrote : and Moses died there ? It is only 
unto this passage Moses wrote, afterwards Joshua wrote the 
rest. These are the words of Eabbi Jehuda, others say of Eabbi 
l^ehemiah, but Eabbi Simeon said to him : Is it possible that the 
book of the Law could lack one letter, since it is written : Take 
this book of the Law ? It is only unto this the Holy One, blessed 
be He ! said, and Moses said and wrote. Erom this place and 
onwards the Holy One, blessed be He, said and Moses wrote with 
weeping. . . . 

(Question) : Joshua wrote his book ? But it is written there : 
And Joshua died. (Iteply): Eleazar finished it. (Question) : But 
yet it is written there: And Eleazar the son of Aaron died. 
(Iteply): Phineas finished it. (Question): Samuel wrote his book? 
But it is written there : And Samuel died, and they buried him in 
Eama. (Reply) : Gad the seer and Nathan the Prophet finished it. 

We have to distinguish, the view of the Tanaim in the 
Baraitha and the view of the Amoraim in the GemaraP' The 
Tanaim do not go beyond the scope of giving (1) the order 
of the Sacred Writings, (2) their editors. 

(1) In the order of the writings we observe several singular 

1 These are the first letters of the Hebrew names of these books. 

2 The Tanaim are the authors of the 3IishnayotJi, the Amoraim are the 
expounders of the Mishnayoth and authors of the Gemara (see Mielziner, Intro- 
duction to the Talmud^ 1894, pp. 22 seq.). 



254 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

features, wliicli lead us to ask whether the order is topical, 
chronological, liturgical, or accidental. The Amoraim ex- 
plain the order generally as topical, although other explana- 
tions are given, but their reasons are inconsistent and 
unsatisfactory. Is there a chronological reason at the bottom? 
This is clear in the order of three classes, — Law, Prophets, and 
other "Writings. But will it apply to the order of the books 
in the classes ? There seems to be a general observance of the 
chronological order, if we consider the subject-matter as the 
determining factor, and not the time of composition. In 
the order of the Prophets, Jeremiah precedes Ezekiel properly. 
But why does Isaiah follow ? Is it out of a consciousness that 
Isaiah was a collection of several writings besides those of the 
great Isaiah ,i or from the feeling that Isaiah's prophecies had 
more to do with the restoration than the exile, and so naturally 
followed Ezekiel ? The Minor Prophets are arranged in three 
groups, and these groups are chronological in order. Hosea 
was placed first out of a mistaken interpretation of his intro- 
ductory words. Malachi appropriately comes last. But this 
order of the Prophets in the Baraitha is abandoned by the 
Massorites, who arrange Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel. In the 
other writings there is a sort of chronological order if we con- 
sider the subject-matter, but the Massoretic text differs from 
the Baraitha entirely, and indeed the Spanish and German 
manuscripts from one another. We cannot escape the convic- 
tion that there was a liturgical reason at the basis of the 
arrangement, which has not yet been determined. At all 
events, its authority has little weight for purposes of Higher 
Criticism. 

(2) As to their editorship. The verb " wrote," ^ cannot 
imply composition in the sense of authorship in several cases 
of its use, but must be used in the sense of editorship or re- 
daction. Thus it is said that the men of the Great Synagogue 
wrote Ezekiel, the Minor Prophets, Daniel, and the roll of 
Esther. This cannot mean that they were the original authors, 
but that they were editors of these books. It is not stated 
whether they edited them by copy from originals or from oral 
1 Strack in Herzog, Beal Ency., VII. p. 43. 2 ^nD. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 255 

tradition. Rashi takes the latter alternative, and thinks that 
holy books could not be written outside of Palestine. ^ An 
insuperable objection to this editing of Daniel and Esther 
at the same time as Ezekiel and the Twelve, is their exclusion 
from the order of the Prophets, where they would have naturally 
gone if introduced into the Canon at that time ; Esther with 
the prophetic histories, and Daniel with Isaiah, Ezekiel, and 
Jeremiah. 2 

Again, when it is said Hezekiah and his company wrote 
Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes, this can 
only mean editorship, and not authorship. The Tosaphoth on 
the Baraitha says : " Hezekiah and his college wrote Isaiah ; 
because Hezekiah caused them to busy themselves with the 
law, the matter was called after his name. But he (Hezekiah) 
did not write it himself, because he died before Isaiah, since 
Manasseh, his successor, killed Isaiah." The redaction of 
Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes by Hezekiah's 
company, is probably a conjecture based upon Proverbs 25. ^ 
But the whole story is incredible. It carries with it a Canon 
of Hezekiah, and would be inconsistent with the subsequent 
positions of these books in the Canon. ^ 

David is represented as editing the Psalter Avith the aid of 
ten ancients ; that is, he used the Psalms of the ten worthies 
and united them with his own in the collection. Moses is 
represented as writing his book, the section of Balaam and 
Job. The section of Balaam is distinguished probably as 
edited and not composed by Moses. In view of the usage 
of the rest of this Baraitha^ we cannot be sure whether it 
means that Moses edited the Law and Job, or whether here 
" wrote " means authorship. The same uncertainty hangs over 
the references to Joshua, Samuel, Jeremiah, and Ezra. 

The statements of the Baraitha^ therefore, seem rather to 
concern official editorship than authorship, and it distinguishes 
no less than eight stages of redaction of the Old Testament 
Scriptures : (1) By Moses, (2) Joshua, (3) Samuel, (4) David, 

1 Strack in Herzog, Beal Ency., VII. p. 418; Wright, Koheleth, pp. 454 seq. ; 
Wogue, Histoire de la Bible, pp. 19 seq. 

2 See pp. 123 seq. ^ See pp. 124 seq. 



256 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

(5) Hezekiah and his college, (6) Jeremiali, (7) the men of 
the Great Synagogue, (8) Ezra. 

The G-emara in its commentary upon this passage enlarges 
this work of redaction so as to give a number of additional 
prophets a hand in it. Joshua completes the work of Moses, 
Eleazar the work of Joshua, and Phineas his work ; Gad and 
Nathan finish the work of Samuel, then come David, Hezekiah, 
Jeremiah, the men of the Great Synagogue ; and Nehemiah 
finishes the work of Ezra. 

III. HELLE]!in:STIC AND CHRISTIAN THEORIES 

Having considered the Rabbinical tradition, we are now 
prepared to examine that of the Jewish historian, Josephus. 
His general statement is : 

" We have not myriads of books among us disagreeing and con- 
tradicting one another, but only twenty-two, comprising the his- 
tory of all past time, justly worthy of belief. And five of them 
are those of Moses, which comprise the Law and the tradition of 
the generation of mankind until his death. This time extends 
to a little less than three thousand years. From the death of 
jMoses until Artaxerxes, the king of the Persians after Xerxes, 
the prophets after Moses composed that which transpired in their 
times in thirteen books. The other four books present hjmms to 
God and rules of life for men." ^ 

"And now David, being freed from wars and dangers, and 
enjoying a profound peace, composed songs and hymns to God 
of several sorts of metre : some of those which he made were trim- 
eters, and some were pentameters." ^ 

Josephus' views as to Hebrew literature vary somewhat from 
the Talmud. He strives to exalt the Hebrew Scriptures in 
every way as to style, antiquity, and variety above the classic 
literature of Greece. He represents Moses as the author of 
the Pentateuch, even of the last eight verses describing his 
own death.2 Scholars do not hesitate to reject his views of the 
number and arrangement of the books in the Canon, or his 
statements as to the metres of Hebrew poetry ; we certainly 
cannot accept his authority without criticism, in questions of 

1 Contra Apion. I. § 8 2 Antiq., VII. 12. » Antiq., IV. 8, 48. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 257 

authorship. Philo agrees with Josephus in making Moses by 
]3rophetic inspiration the author of the narrative of his own 
death,! ]j^j^ j^as little to say about matters that concern the 
Higher Criticism. 

A still more ancient authority than the Talmud, and an au- 
thority historically to Christians higher than Josephus, is the 
Apocalypse of Ezra, from the first Christian century, printed 
among the apocryphal books in the English Bible, and pre- 
served in five versions, and used not infrequently by the 
Fathers as if it were inspired Scripture. This tradition repre- 
sents that the Law and all the holy books Avere burned at the 
destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar and lost ; that 
Ezra under divine inspiration restored them all, and also com- 
posed seventy others to be delivered to the wise as the esoteric 
wisdom for the interpretation of the twenty-four.^ 

This view of the restoration of the Old Testament writings 
by Ezra was advocated by some of the Fathers. Clement of 
Alexandria ^ says : 

" Since the Scriptures perished in the captivity of Nebuchad- 
nezzar, Esdras the Levite, the priest, in the time of Artaxerxes, 
king of the Persians having become inspired, in the exercise of 
prophecy restored again the whole of the ancient Scriptures." 

So, also, Tertullian,* Chrysostom,^ an ancient writing attrib- 
uted to Augustine,^ the heretical Clementine homilies.'' Another 
common opinion of the Fathers is represented by Irenseus : ^ 

1 Life of Moses, III. 39. 

2 Ezra saith : "For tliy law is burnt, therefore no man knoweth the things 
that are done of thee, or the works that shall begin. But if I have found grace 
before thee, send the Holy Ghost into me, and I shall write all that hath been 
done in the world since the beginning, which were written in thy law, that men 
may find thy path," etc. "Come hither (saith God), and I shall light a 
candle of understanding in thine heart which shall not be put out, till the things 
be performed which thou shalt begin to write. And when thou hast done, some 
things shalt thou publish, and some things shalt thou show secretly to the wise. 
. . . The first that thou hast written publish openly, that the worthy and the 
unworthy may read it ; but keep the seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them 
only to such as be wise among the people ; for in them is the spring of under- 
standing, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge" (ll^i-*^). 

^ Stromata, I. 22. * De cuUu foeminarum, c. 3. 

^ Horn. VIII. in Epist. HebrcBOS, Migne's edition, XVII. p. 74. 
^ De mirabilibus sacrce scripturce, II. 33, printed with Augustine's works, 
but not genuine. ^ Horn. III. c. 47. ^ ^^^^ Hcereses, III. 21, 2. 

s 



258 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

" During the captivity of the people under Nebuchadnezzar, the 
Scriptures had been corrupted, and when, after seventy years, the 
Jews had returned to their own land, then in the time of Artax- 
erxes King of the Persians, [God] inspired Esdras the priest, of 
the tribe of Levi, to recast all the words of former prophets, and 
to reestablish with the people the Mosaic legislation." 

So, also, Theodoret ^ and Basil. ^ Jerome ^ says with reference 
to this tradition : " Whether you wish to say that Moses is the 
author of the Pentateuch, or that Ezra restored it, is indiffer- 
ent to me." Bellarmin * is of the opinion that the books of the 
Jews were not entirely lost, but that Ezra corrected those that 
had become corrupted, and improved the copies he restored. 

Jerome, in the fourth century, relied largely upon Jewish 
Rabbinical authority, and gave his great influence toward bring- 
ing the fluctuating traditions in the Church into more accord- 
ance with the Rabbinical traditions, but he could not entirely 
succeed. He held that the orphan Psalms belonged as a rule 
to the preceding ones, and in general followed the rabbins in 
associating the sacred writings with the familiar names, — 
Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Ezra, and so on. There is, 
however, no consensus of the Fathers on these topics. 

Junilius, in the midst of the sixth century, author of the first 
extant Introduction,^ a reproduction of a lost work of his in- 
structor, Paul of Nisibis, of the Antiochian school of Exegesis, 
presents a view which may be regarded as representing very 
largely the Oriental and Western churches. He divides the 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments into seventeen his- 
tories, seventeen prophecies, two proverbial and seventeen doc- 
trinal writings. Under authorship, he makes the discrimination 
between those having their authors indicated in their titles and 
introductions, and those whose authorship r^sts purely on tra- 
dition, including among the latter the Pentateuch and Joshua.^ 

1 Pra2f. in Psalmos. 

2 Epist. ad Chilonem, Migne's edition, IV. p. 358. See Simon, Hist. Crit. de 
Vieux Test., Amsterd., 1685, and Fabricius, Codex Pseudepicjraph.., Hamburg, 
1722, pp. 1156 seq. ^ Adv. Helvidium. ^ De verba Dei., lib. 2. 

^ Institutio Begularis Divince Legis. 

6 " Scriptores divinorum librorum qua ratione cognoscimus ? Tribus modis : 
aut ex titulis et proemiis ut propbeticos libros et apostoli epistolas, ant ex titulis 
tantum ut evangelistas, aut ex traditione veterum ut Moyses traditur scripsisse 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 259 

This work of Junilius held its own as an authority in the West- 
ern Church until the Reformation. It would be difficult to define 
a consensus of the first Christian century or of the Fathers in 
regard to the authorship of the historical books of the Old Tes- 
tament or other questions of the Higher Criticism. The variant 
traditions, unfixed and fluctuating, came down to the men of the 
eighteenth century to be tested by the Scriptures, and by the 
principles of the Higher Criticism, and they found no consensus 
patrum and no orthodox doctrines in their way. 

lY. The New Testament View op Old Testaivient 

Literature 
It is claimed, however, that Jesus and His apostles have de- 
termined these questions for us, and that their divine authority 
relieves us of any obligation to investigate further, as their 
testimony is final. This does not seem to have been the view 
of Junilius or the Fathers. So far as we can ascertain, this 
argument was first urged by Maresius,^ in opposition to Peyre- 
rius and pressed by Heidegger, the Swiss scholastic, who sided 
with Buxtorf and Owen against Cappellus and Walton. But 
the argument having been advanced by these divines, and 
fortified by the Lutheran scholastic, Carpzov, and maintained 
by Hengstenberg, Keil, and Home, and by many recent 
writers who lean on these authorities, it is necessary for us to 
test it. Clericus went too far when he said that Jesus Christ 
and His apostles did not come into the world to preach criti- 
cism to the Jews. 2 The response of Hermann Witsius, that 

quinque primos libros historic, cum non dicat hoc titulus nee ipse ref erat ' dixit 
dominus ad me,' sed quasi de alio ' dixit dominus ad Moysen.' Similiter et Jesu 
Nave liber ab eo quo nuncupatur traditur scriptus, et primum regum librum 
Samuel scripsisse perhibetur. Sciendum praeterea quod quorundam librorum 
penitus ignorantur auctores ut Judicum et Ruth et Regum iii. ultimi et cetera 
similia, quod ideo credendum est divinitus dispensatum, ut alii quoque divini 
libri non auctorum merito, sed sancti spiritus gratia tantum culmen auctoritatis 
obtinuisse noscantur " (§ viii. 2;seeKihn, Theodor von Mopsuestia und Junilius 
Africanus als ExegeMn, pp. 319-330). 

1 Maresius, Befutatio Fahulce Preadamitce, 1656 ; Heidegger, Exercit. Bih- 
licce, 1700 ; Dissert. IX. pp. 250 seq. 

2 In Sentimens de quelques Theologiens de Holland sur VHistoire Critique., 
p. 126, Amst., 1685, Clericus says: "Jesus Christ et ses ApStres n'etant pas 
venus au monde, pour ens^gner la Critique au Juifs, il ne faut pas s'^tonner, 
s'ils parlent selon 1' opinion commune." 



260 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Jesus came to teach the truth, and could not be imposed upon 
by common ignorance, or be induced to favour vulgar errors, is 
just.i 

And yet we cannot altogether deny the principle of accom- 
modation in the life and teachings of Jesus. The principle of 
accommodation is a part of the wonderful condescension of the 
divine grace to human weakness, ignorance, and sinfulness. 
Jesus teaches that Moses, because of the hardness of their 
hearts, suffered ancient Israel to divorce their wives for reasons 
which the higher dispensation will not admit as valid. ^ The 
divine revelation is a training-school for the disciple, ever 
reserving from him what he is unable to bear, and holding 
forth the promise of greater light to those using the light 
they have. 

" It is not required in a religious or inspired teacher, nor indeed 
would it be prudent or right, to shock the prejudices of his unin- 
formed hearers, by inculcating truths which they are unprepared 
to receive. If he would reap a harvest, he must prepare the 
ground before he attempts to sow the seed. Neither is it re- 
quired of such an one to persist in inculcating religious instruc- 
tion after such evidence of its rejection as is sufficient to prove 
incurable obstinacy. Now it must be granted that in most of 
these cases there is accommodation. The teacher omits, either 
altogether or in part, certain religious truths, and, perhaps, truths 
of great importance, in accommodation to the incompetency and 
weakness of those whom he has to instruct. ... It appears, 
then, that accommodation may be allowed in matters which have 
no connection with religion, and in these, too, so far as regards 
the degree and the form of instruction. But positive accommoda- 
tion to religious error is not to be found in Scripture, neither is it 
justifiable in moral principle." ^ 



1 " Enim vero non fuere Christus et Apostoli Critices doctores, quales se 
haberi postulant, qui hodie sibi regnum litterarum in quavis vindicant scientia ; 
fuerunt tamen doctores veritatis, neque passi sunt sibi per communem ignoran- 
tiam aut procerum astum imponi. Non certe in munduin venere ut vulgares 
errores foverunt, suaque auctoritate munirent, nee per Judseos solum sed et 
populos unice, a se pendentes longe lateque spargerent." — Misc. Sacra., I. 
p. 117. 

2 Mt. 193. 

3 Dr. S. H. Turner, in his edition of Planck's Introduction to Sacred Philol- 
ogy, Edin., 1834, pp. 275-277. New York, 1834, pp. 280 seq. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 261 

Jesus withheld from the twelve apostles many things of vast 
importance, which they could not know then, but should know 
hereafter. 1 Jesus did not enter into any further conflict with 
the errors of His time than was necessary for His purposes of 
grace in the Gospel. He exercised a wise prudence and a 
majestic reserve in matters of indifference and minor impor- 
tance, and was never premature in declaring Himself and the 
principles of His Gospel. There were no sufficient reasons 
why He should correct the prevailing views as to the Old 
Testament books, and by His authority determine these liter- 
ary questions. He could not teach error, but He could and 
did constantly forbear with reference to errors. Polygamy and 
slavery have been defended from the New Testament because 
Jesus and His apostles did not declare against them. If all 
the views of the men of the time of Christ are to be pronounced 
valid which He did not pronounce against, we shall be involved 
in a labyrinth of difficulties. 

The authorit}^ of Jesus Christ, to all who know Him to be 
their divine Saviour, outweighs all other authority whatever. 
A Christian man must follow His teachings in all things as the 
guide into all truth. The authority of Jesus Christ is involved 
in that of the apostles. What, then, do Jesus and His apostles 
teach as to the questions of Higher Criticism ? If they used the 
language of the day in speaking of the Old Testament books, 
it does not follow that they adopted any of the various views 
of authorship and editorship that went with these terms in the 
Talmud, or in Josephus, or in the Apocalypse of Ezra ; for we 
are not to interpret their words on this or on any other subject 
by Josephus, or the Mishna, or the Apocalypse of Ezra, or any 
such external authorities, but by the plain grammatical and 
contextual sense of their words themselves. From the various 
New Testament passages we present the following summary of 
what is taught on these subjects : 

I. Of the Writings the only ones used in the New Testa- 
ment in connection with names of persons are the Psalter and 
Daniel. With reference to Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Prov- 
erbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Lamentations, 

1 John 137. 



262 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUKE 

and Ruth, the New Testament gives no evidence whatever in 
questions of the Higher Criticism.^ 

1. The Psalter. 

Saint Peter cites Ps. 69^^ 109^ as "which the Holy Spirit spake 
before by the mouth of David," and " For it is written in the 
book of Psalms." 2 The assembled Christians cite Ps. 2^"^ as 
"by the Holy Spirit by the mouth of our father David. "^ 
Saint Peter cites Pss. 16^^ 110^ as "David saith."* Saint 
Paul cites Ps. 6922-23 as " David saith " ; & and Ps. 32i-2 as " David 
also pronounceth blessing."^ Jesus cites Ps. 110^ as "David 
himself said in the Holy Spirit. "^ 

The maximum of evidence here is as to the Davidic 
authorship of Pss. 2, 16, 32, 69, 109, and 110, in all, six 
Psalms out of the 150 contained in the Psalter. As to 
the rest, there is no use of them in connection with a name. 
There is, however, a passage upon which the Davidic author- 
ship of the entire Psalter has been based,^ where a citation 

1 For a fuller discussion of this subject, we would refer to the exhaustive 
paper of Prof. Francis Brown, ' ' The New Testament Witness to the Authorship 
of Old Testament Books," in the Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature 
and Exegesis, 1882, pp. 95 seq. 

2 Acts, ll<^20. 3 Acts 425. 4 Acts 225-29, 34. 5 Rom. 119-10. 6 Rom. 46-8. 

"' Mk. 1236-37. Mt. 2243-45 cites here from Mark, and condenses into " How then 
doth David in the Spirit call him," and Lk. 2042-^* also cites from Mark, and 
varies " For David himself saith in the Book of Psalms." 

8 Thus, William Gouge, one of the most honoured Puritan divines, in his 
Commentary on Hebrews, in discussing this passage, says : 

"From the mention of David in reference to the Psalm, we may probably 
conclude that David was the penman of the whole Book of Psalms, especially 
from this phrase, 'David himself saith in the Book of Psalms' (Lk. 2042). 
Some exceptions are made against this conclusion, but such as may readily be 
answered. 

" Objection 1. — Sundry psalms have not the title of David prefixed before 
them ; they have no title at all, as the first, second, aud others. Ans. — If they 
have no title, why should they not be ascribed to David, rather than to any 
other, considering that the Book of Psalms is indefinitely attributed to him (as 
we heard out of the f orementioned place, Lk. 2042) ^ which is the title prefixed 
before all the Psalms, as comprising them all under it ? Besides, such testimo- 
nies as are taken out of Psalms that have no title are applied to David, as 
Acts 425, and this testimony that is here taken out of Ps. 95'^. 

" Objection 2. — Some titles are ascribed to other authors ; as Ps. 72, 127, to 
Solomon. Ans. — The Hebrew servile lamed is variously taken and translated ; 
as sometimes, of Ps. 31, ' A Psalm of David. ' Then it signifieth the author : 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 263 

from Ps. 957 ^ is given " in David, iv AavelS.'' ^ This means 
that David was the name of the Psalter and that this title 
was used interchangeably with "the book of Psalms," or 
"Psalms." 

Accordingly, " David " in all the examples given above, may 
be nothing more than a name for the entire Psalter, and may 
have no personal reference to David whatever ; for it matters 
little whether a citation is made "in David," "by David," or 
" as Da-sdd saith " ; these all mean essentially the same thing ; 
and if David is a name for the Psalter in one case, it may be in 
all cases. An exception may be made in the citation of Ps. 
110 by Jesus. The argument of Jesus seems to depend upon 
the fact that David himself said the words, "The Lord said 
unto my Lord." But this would be sufficiently considered, if 
we should suppose that the author of the Psalm, in composing 
it, let David appear as the speaker here. 

Thus it is used in most titles, especially when they are applied to David. Other 
time this is translated for, as Ps. 72i, 127i. In these it implieth that the Psalm 
was penned /or Solomon's use or for his instruction. It may also be thus trans- 
lated, concerning Solomon. That the 72d Psalm was penned by David is evi- 
dent by the close thereof, in these words : ' The prayers of David the son of 
Jesse are ended. ' 

" Objection 3. — Some titles ascribe the Psalm to this or that Levite, as Ps. 88 
to Heman and 80 to Ethan ; yea, twelve Psalms to Asaph and eleven to the 
sons of Korah. Ans. — All these were very skillful, not only in singing, but 
also in setting tunes to Psalms. They were musick masters. Therefore, David, 
having penned the Psalms, committed them to the foresaid Levites to be fitly 
tmied. ... It will not follow that any of them were enditers of any of the 
Psalms, because their name is set in the title of some of them. 

" Objection 4. — The 90th Psalm carried this title : ' A Prayer of Moses the 
Man of God. ' Ans. — It is said to be the prayer of Moses in regard of the 
substance and general matter of it ; but, as a Psalm, it was penned by David. 
He brought it into that form. David, as a prophet, knew that Moses had 
uttered such a prayer in the substance of it ; therefore, he prefixeth that title 
before it. 

" Objection 5. — The 137th Psalm doth set down the disposition and carriage 
of the Israelites in the Babylonish Captivity, which was six hundred fourty 
years after David's time, and the 126th Psalm sets out their return from that 
Captivity. Ans. — To grant these to be so, yet might David pen those Psalms ; 
for, by a prophetical spirit, he might foresee what would fall out and answerably 
pen Psalms fit thereunto. Moses did the like (Dt. 2922, etc., and 312i>22^ etc.). 
A man of God expressly set down distinct acts of Josiah 330 years before they 
fell out (1 K. 132). Isaiah did the like of Cyrus (Is. 4428 ; 45^), which was 
about two hundred years beforehand." 

1 Heb. 47. 



264 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Dr. Plummer may be cited for an explanation of this citation by 
Jesus : 

^^ Tbe last word has not yet been spoken as to the authorship of 
Ps. 110 ; but it is a mistake to maintain that Jesus has decided the 
quesiion. There is nothing antecedently incredible in the hypoth- 
esis that in such matters, as in other details of human informa- 
tion, He condescended not to know more than His contemporaries, 
and that He therefore believed what He had been taught in the 
school and in the synagogue. 'Nov ought we summarily to dismiss 
the suggestion that, although He knew that the Psalm was not 
written by David, He yet abstained from challenging beliefs re- 
specting matters of fact, because the premature and violent cor- 
rection of such beliefs would have been more harmful to His work 
than their undisturbed continuance would be. In this, as in many 
things, the correction of erroneous opinion might well be left to 
time. But this suggestion is less satisfactory than the other 
hypothesis. It should be noticed that, while Jesus affirms both 
the inspiration (Mt., Mk.) and the Messianic character (Mt., Mk., 
Lk.) of Ps. 110, yet the argumentative question with which He 
concludes, need not be understood as asserting that David is the 
author of it, although it seems to imply this. It may mean no 
more than that the scribes have not fairly faced what their own 
principles involve. Here is a problem with which they ought to 
be quite familiar, and of which they ought to be able to give a solu- 
tion. It is their position, and not His, that is open to criticism." ^ 

This explanation is a valid one, although it is not the one which 
I prefer. 

The modern Higher Criticism does not, in fact, assign a 
single one of these Psalms to David. In the Hebrew text, 
Pss. 16, 32, 69, 109, 110, have David in their titles, but Ps. 2 
is an orphan Psalm v^ithout title. David in the titles of these 
Psalms did not originally mean authorship ; it meant that these 
Psalms were taken by the editor of the Psalter from a collec- 
tion of Psalms, which bore the name of David, in that they had 
been gathered under his name as a sort of honorary title. The 
earliest minor Psalter was called David, just as eventually the 
ultimate Psalter was called David. 

The question of integrity is raised by the citation of our 
Ps. 2 as Ps. 1, according to the best manuscripts.^ Were 

1 Plummer, Commentary on Luke, 1896, pp. 472, 473. 

2 Acts 1333. So Tischendorf, Critica Major, Eclitio Octava. Westcott and 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 265 

these two Psalms combined in one at the time, or was the first 
Psalm regarded as introductory and not counted ? Both views 
are supported by manuscripts and citations. 

2. Daniel 11^^ = 12^^ is used under the formula, " which was 
spoken through Daniel the prophet."^ With reference to 
this, I will simply quote the judicious words of Francis 
Brown : 

^•It will be remembered that the passage cited in Mt. 24^^ 
is from the second division of the book, a division which, with the 
exception of certain brief introductory notes, contains prophecies 
exclusively, and that this division is distinctly marked off from 
the preceding by the nature of its contents, and by the brief intro- 
duction, Dan. 7\ 'Now, suppose evidence were to be presented 
from other quarters to show that while the book as a whole was 
not written by Daniel, the last six chapters contained prophecies 
of Daniel, which the later author had incorporated in his book. 
On that supposition, the words of Jesus taken in their most rigid, 
literal meaning would be perfectly satisfied. We may go yet 
further. If other evidence should be adduced tending to show 
that ' Daniel, the prophet,' was a pseudonym, still there would be 
nothing in Jesus' use of the expression to commit Him to any other 
view. For the words were certainly written, and written in the 
form of a prophecy, and were a prophecy, and the book containing 
them was an inspired, canonical, and authoritative book ; the cita- 
tion was, therefore, suitable and forcible for Jesus' purposes, who- 
ever the author may have been, and the use of a current pseudonym 
to designate the author no more committed Jesus to a declaration 
that that was the author's real name, than our use of the expres- 
sion ^Junius says' would commit us to a declaration that the 
Letters of Junius were composed by a person of that name ; or 
than, on the supposition already discussed, that 'Enoch' was 
regarded as a pseudonym, Jude 14 would indicate the belief of 
the author that Enoch himself actually uttered the words which 
he quotes." ^ 

II. The Prophets. 1. The only one of the former prophets 
or the prophetic historical books mentioned in connection with 

Hort say that ' ' Transcriptional Probability, which prima facie supports Trptir y, 
is in reality favourable or unfavourable to both readings alike " {I.e., Appendix, 
p. 95). 

1 Mt. 2415. B;it this is evidently an addition by our Matthew, and it was 
not spoken by Jesus, for it is not in Mk. 13^^ or Lk. 212°. 

^ In I.e., pp. 106, 107. 



266 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

a name is Samuel : ^ " All the prophets from Samuel and them 
that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of 
these days." The reference here is to the book of Samuel, for 
the reason that there is no Messianic prophecy ascribed to 
Samuel in the Old Testament. The context forces us to think 
of a Messianic prophecy. We find it in the prophecy of Nathan 
in the book of Samuel. These historical books then bore the 
name of Samuel, and their contents are referred to as Samuel's. 

Samuel cannot be regarded as the author of this book that 
bears his name. Indeed, Samuel's death is described in the 
twenty-fifth chapter of 1 Samuel, that is, about the middle of 
the books. The book of Samuel shows the hands of three dif- 
ferent writers, not one of them so early as Samuel. Samuel 
is used as an appropriate honorary title of the book, just as 
David was of the Psalter ; and he is represented as saying 
whatever is in the book, even the words of Nathan, jast as 
David speaks all that the psalmists speak in the Psalms. 

As to Joshua, Judges, and Kings we have no use of them in 
such a way as to raise questions of Higher Criticism. 

2. Of the latter prophets the New Testament refers only to 
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, and Joel in connection with names. 
Ezekiel and nine of the minor prophets are not used in such a 
way as to raise questions of Higher Criticism. Jonah ^ is re- 
ferred to as a prophet in connection with his preaching to the 
Ninevites and his abode in the belly of the great fish, but no 
such reference is made to the book that bears his name as to 
imply his authorship of it. The question whether Jonah is his- 
tory or fiction is not decided by Jesus' use of it ; for as a para- 
ble it answered His purpose no less than if it were history. 

3. Hosea l^o, 223 ^re quoted^ as "in Hosea." This is 
probably nothing more than the name of the writing used. 
Joel 2^^"^^ is quoted:* "This is that which hath been spoken 
through the prophet Joel." No questions need to be raised as 
to these passages. 

4. Jeremiah is cited,^ under the formula, "that which was 
spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying." The former 
citation is from Jeremiah 31^^ the latter from Zechariah It^^-is. 

1 Acts 324. 2 Mt. 1239-41. 3 Rom. 925. 4 Acts 216. 6 Mt. 217 279. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 267 

This raises the question of the integrity of Zechariah. On the 
basis of this passage Chapters 9-11 of Zechariah were ascribed 
to Jeremiah by Mede, Hammond, and Kidder. ^ But it is now 
generally conceded that the evangelist has made a mistake. 
This raises the question how far errors of this character affect 
the credibility of a writing. 

5. Isaiah is frequently cited in the New Testament in the 
formula, '' through Isaiah the prophet, saying." Thus the evan- 
gelist Matthew cites ^ Is. 9^''^; 40^, 42^ 53^; and the author 
of the book of Acts^ Is. 6^^^^-. The formula "Isaiah said" is 
used in the citation of Is. 6^ ^^^^ 40^, in the Gospel of John ; ^ the 
citation of Is. lll^ 5S\ 63^''^; in the Epistle to the Romans.^ 
The formula, " the book of the words of the prophet Isaiah," 
is used by Luke ^ in citing Is. 40^"^, 61^-^. Is. 53^ is cited as 
the "word of Isaiah the prophet" ;^ Is. 53^"^ as "reading the 
prophet Isaiah" ; ^ Is. 10^2 «^2- as "Isaiah cries out" ; ^ Is. 1^ as 
" Isaiah foretold" ; ^^ Is. Q^-^o ^g " prophecy of Isaiah " ; " Is. 29^^ 
as "Isaiah prophesied." ^2 Besides these there is a passage of 
more difficulty, ^^ where, with the formula, " written in Isaiah 
the prophet," are cited Mai. 3^ and Is. 40^. This seems to be 
a clear case in which the evangelist has overlooked the fact 
that one of his citations is from Malachi. This raises the 
question how far such a slip is consistent with credibility. 
The various formulas of citation seem on the surface to imply 
the authorship of our book of Isaiah by the prophet Isaiah, 
and also its essential integrity, inasmuch as the citations are 
from all parts of the book. But we have found that Samuel 
is represented as prophesying, when the prophecy is by Nathan 
in the book that bore the name of Samuel, and that David 
speaks in all the Psalms. How can we be sure that this is 
not the case with Isaiah, likewise, in the phrases, "through 
Isaiah the prophet, saying," "Isaiah said," "words of Isaiah 
the prophet," " Isaiah cries out," " Isaiah foretold," " Isaiah 
prophesied"? The phrases, "book of the prophet Isaiah," 

1 See p. 310. 2 Mt. 41*, 33, 12i7, 8i^. s Acts 2825. * John 1239-41, 123. 

5 Rom. 1512, 1016, 20-21. 6 Lk. 34, 417. 7 John 1238. 

8 Acts 828-30. 9 Rom. 927. 10 Rom. 929. 

11 Mt. 1314. 12 Mk. 76 = Mt. 157. 13 Mk. 123. 



268 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

"reading the prophet Isaiah," "prophecy of Isaiah," certainly 
imply nothing more than naming the book. 

They may be interpreted in several ways: either that Isaiah 
wrote all the book of Isaiah, or that he wrote the earlier por- 
tions of it, and that the prophecies appended by the later edi- 
tors of the book did not change its name ; or that it came down 
by tradition associated with the name of Isaiah, having been 
edited under his name when the second Canon was established. 
These terms no more imply authorship than the names Ruth, 
Esther, Samuel, David. In fact, ten of the citations in the 
New Testament given above are from Is. -10-66, which, as all 
modern critics agree, was not written by Isaiah, or in the time 
of Isaiah, but in the time of the exile, by a great prophet un- 
named and unknown. The remaining citations would be com- 
monly regarded as genuine prophecies of Isaiah. 

III. The Law. 1. Jesus speaks of " the Law of Moses" ^ and 
"the book of Moses." ^ The evangelist uses "Moses " for the 
Law.^ So the apostles refer to "the Law of Moses," * and use 
" Moses " for the Law.^ These are all cases of naming books 
cited. They have as their parallel David as the name of the 
Psalter ; Samuel, also, of the book of Samuel.^ It is certainly 
reasonable to interpret Moses in these passages in the same 
way, as the name of the work containing his legislation, and 
the history in which he is the central figure. 

2. (a) Jesus cites from the fifth commandment, Ex. 20^2, 
and from a statute of the code of the Covenant, Ex. 21^^, ac- 
cording to Mark as " Moses said," corrected by Matthew into 
" God said." " The former of these was uttered by God to the 
people, and was written upon one of the tables as the fifth of 
the Ten Words. The other was a statute, not in the original 
Book of the Covenant, but taken up into it from a pentade 
of statutes, coming originally from the most ancient lawgivers 
of Israel.^ 

(5) Jesus said to the leper, " Go thy way, shew thyself to 
the priest, and offer for thy cleansing the things which Moses 

1 John 723. 2 Mk. 1226. 3 Lk. 2427. * Acts 2823. 

5 Acts 1521, 2 Cor. gis. e Heb. 4?, Acts 324. See p. 323. 7 Mk. T^" = Mt. 15*. 
8 Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch. New edition, 1897, p. 219. 



HIGHEK CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 269 

commanded, for a testimony unto them."^ This refers to the 
law for cleansing the leper in Lev. 14. It belongs to the Priest 
code, the last codification of Hebrew law in the time of the 
exile. 

((?) In discussing the question of divorce with the Pharisees, 
Jesus said, " What did Moses command you ? And they said, 
Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her 
away. But Jesus said unto them. For your hardness of heart 
he wrote you this commandment." ^ This law of divorce is in 
Deut. 24I"*. It is one of the judgments from the courts of the 
elders belonging to the earlier strata of the Deuteronomic code.^ 

(d) Jesus said, " Did not Moses give you the law, and yet 
none of you doeth the law ? . . . Moses hath given you cir- 
cumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers) ; and on 
the Sabbath ye circumcise a man. If a man receiveth circum- 
cision on the Sabbath, that the law of Moses may not be 
broken ; are ye wroth with me, because I made a man every 
whit whole on the Sabbath ? " * Here Jesus ascribes the whole 
Law to Moses, and specifically the law of circumcision. This 
latter is corrected by the editor of the original John, who here, 
as so often, inserts a qualifying or explanatory statement. The 
editor calls attention to the fact that circumcision was not 
exactly of Moses, but of the Fathers. He remembers that it 
was given to Abraham by God, and not first to Moses. Indeed, 
there is surprisingly little in the Law codes with reference to 
circumcision. In the Priest code, in connection with the law 
for purification of women after childbirth, the circumcision of 
the boy comes in incidentally.^ There is then a reference to 
the circumcision of the son of Moses,^ and a law for the cir- 
cumcision of strangers.''' There can be little doubt that the 
original John represents Jesus as stating that Moses gave the 
law of circumcision, which was really given by God to Abra- 
ham. He does it because of the usage of his day. Moses and 
Law were identical terms, and whatever was written in the five 
books of the Law could be ascribed to Moses, just the same as 
whatever was written in the Psalter was ascribed to David, 

• 1 Mk. 144 = Mt. 84 = Lk. 514. 2 Mk. io3-5. Mt. 19^-8. 3 Briggs, I.e., p. 253. 
4 John 719-23. 5 Lev. 123. 6 Ex. 426. 7 Ex. 1244-48. 



270 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and whatever was spoken in the book of Samuel was ascribed 
to Samuel. In fact, Jesus in these several passages ascribes to 
Moses, in this larger sense, the fifth commandment, spoken 
by God to Israel, the law of circumcision given by God to 
Abraham, the statute of the Covenant code derived from the 
primitive courts of Israel, the judgment of the Deuteronomic 
code derived from the courts of the elders, and the law of the 
Priest code derived from the priestly courts. They can, with 
propriety, be attributed to Moses, using Moses as the name for 
the books of the Law and all the legislation contained therein. 
But, in fact, none of these specific laws were given to Moses 
or were derived from Moses. They were either earlier or later 
than Moses, except the fifth command, which was given by 
God directly to all the people. 

The Epistle to the Hebrews represents Moses as giving the 
law of priesthood, and as a lawgiver whose law could not be 
disobeyed with impunity. ^ These passages represent Moses 
to be the lawgiver that he appears to be in the narratives of 
the Pentateuch ; but do not, by any means, imply the author- 
ship of the narratives that contain these laws, any more than 
the reference ^ to the command of Christ in Lk. 10^, and to the 
institution of the Lord's Supper by Jesus,^ imply that Jesus was 
the author of the gospels containing His words. 

3. Moses is frequently referred to as a prophet who wrote of 
Jesus as the Messianic prophet.* All these references are 
doubtless to the prediction of Deut. IS^^'^^. There is no suffi- 
cient reason for doubting that Moses uttered such a prophecy, 
although its present form shows the hand of the Deuteronomic 
redactor.^ But the references here might still all be explained 
of Moses as standing for the whole Law, and so as uttering all 
the prophecies contained in the Law, just as Samuel uttered 
the prophecy of Nathan. There is certainly nothing in these 
statements to imply that Moses wrote the book of Deuter- 
onomy, or the Deuteronomic code, or the entire Law. 

4. Certain historical events narrated in the Pentateuch in 

1 Heb. 714, 1028. 2 1 Cor. Qi-^. ^ i Cor. 1123 se?. 

* John 145, 546,47. Acts 322-24, 737^ 2622. 

5 Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, 7th ed., 1898, pp. 112 seq. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 271 

which Moses takes the lead are mentioned,^ but these simply 
refer to the historical character of the transactions; they do 
not imply exclusive Mosaic authorship of the writings contain- 
ing these historical incidents. 

5. In the passage, "Moses indeed said, A prophet shall the 
Lord God raise up unto you, etc. . . . Yea, and all the 
prophets from Samuel, and them that followed after, as many 
as have spoken, they also told of these days," ^ it is necessary 
to interpret " Samuel " of the book of Samuel, and think of the 
prophecy of Nathan ; and if this be so, is it not most natural 
to interpret "Moses" here as also referring to the book of 
Deuteronomy rather than the person of Moses? If that be 
true in this case, it may also be true of other cases classed 
under (2) and (3). Samuel cannot, it is admitted, be regarded 
as the author of the book that bears his name ; why, then, 
should any one suppose that we are forced to conclude from 
these passages that Moses is the author of the books that bear 
his name ? 

It has been objected that this method of determining what 
the words of Jesus and His apostles may mean in detail does 
not show what they miiBt mean when taken together. It has, 
however, been forgotten by the objectors that the proper exe- 
getical method is inductive, and that the path of exegesis is to 
rise from the particulars to the general. The dogmatic method 
is in the habit of saying a passage mii8t mean thus and so from 
dogmatic presuppositions. The exegete prefers the may until 
he is forced to the mu8t. He has learned to place little confi- 
dence in the " must mean " of tradition and dogmatism ; for 
he has so often been obliged to see it transform into mu8t not^ 
impossible^ from exegetical considerations. Who, then, is to say 
must in the interpretation of the New Testament, exterior to 
itself ? Is the Talmud to say must to the words of our Lord 
Jesus ? Is the traitor Josephus, or the pseudepigraph of Ezra, 
to say must in an interpretation of the apostles ? Nay. We 
let them speak for themselves, and if we are to choose between 
a variety of possible interpretations of their words we prefer 
to let Higher Criticism decide. For Higher Criticism is exact 
1 Heb. 85, 919 1221 etc. 2 Acts 322-24. 



272 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and thorough in its methods, and prefers the internal evidence 
of the Old Testament books themselves to any external evi- 
dence. This may bring Jesus into conflict with Josephus and 
the rabbins and with traditional theories ; but it is more likely 
to bring Him into harmony with Moses and the Prophets. 
Professor B. Weiss has well said in another connection: 

'^ However certainly, therefore, the religions ideas of later 
Judaism, as well as the doctrines of Jewish Theology, had an 
influence upon the forming of the religious consciousness as it is 
exhibited in the writings of the New Testament, our knowledge 
of the extent in which these ideas and doctrines lay within the 
field of vision of the writers of the New Testament is far from 
being precise enough to permit us to start from them in ascertain- 
ing that religious consciousness. It is only in the rarest cases 
that biblical theology will be able to make use of them with cer- 
tainty for the purpose of elucidation." ^ 

No one could emphasize the importance of historical exegesis 
more than we are disposed to do ; but we cannot allow tradi- 
tionalists — who are the last to use this method except when, 
for the time being, it serves their purposes — by the improper 
use of it to force upon criticism interpretations that are possible 
but not necessary, and which are excluded by other and higher 
considerations presented by the Word of God as contained in 
the Scriptures of the Old Testament. 

It has been a common literary usage for centuries to repre- 
sent a book as speaking by the name by which it is known, 
whether that be a pseudonym, or indicate the subject-matter 
or the author. To insist that it must always in the New Testa- 
ment indicate authorship is to go in the face of the literary 
usage of the world, and against the usage of the New Testament 
itself, certainly in the cases of Samuel and David and, therefore, 
probably in other cases also, such as Moses and Isaiah. 

We have shown that the questions of Higher Criticism have 
not been determined by the ecclesiastical authority of creeds or 
the consensus of tradition. And it is a merciful Providence 

^Biblical Theology of the New Testament, T. & T. Clark's edition. Edin., 
1882, I. p. 14. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 273 

that this has not been the case. For it would have committed 
the Church and Christians to many errors which have been ex- 
posed by a century of progress in the Higher Criticism. Those 
who still insist upon opposing Higher Criticism with traditional 
views, and with the supposed authority of Jesus Christ and His 
apostles, do not realize the perils of the situation. They seem 
to be so infatuated with inherited opinions that they are ready 
to risk the divinity of Christ, the authority of the Bible, and 
the existence of the Church, upon their interpretation of the 
words of Jesus and His apostles. They apparentl}^ do not see 
that they throAv up a wall to prevent any critic who is an un- 
believer from ever becoming a believer in Christ and the Bible. 
They would force evangelical critics to choose between truth 
and scholarly research on the one side, and Christ and tradition 
on the other. But there are many far better scholars who are 
Christian critics, and they will not be deterred from criticism 
themselves, or allow others to be deterred, by these reactionary 
alarmists. The issue is plain, the result is not doubtful: the 
obstructionists will give way in this matter, as they have already 
in so many other matters. ^ Holy Scripture will vindicate itself 
against those who, like the friends of Job, have not spoken 
right concerning God^ in presuming to defend Him. 

V. The Rise of the Higher Criticism. 

The current critical theories are the resultants of forces at 
work in the Church since the Reformation. These forces have 
advanced steadily and constantly. In each successive epoch 
scholars have investigated afresh the sacred records and brought 
forth treasures new as Avell as old. Various theories have been 
proposed from time to time to account for the new facts that 
have been brought to light. Biblical science has shared the 
fortune of the entire circle of the sciences. The theories have 
been modified or discarded under the influence of additional in- 
vestigations and the discovery of new facts for which they could 
not account. The facts have remained in every case as a per- 
manent acquisition of Biblical Criticism, and these facts have 
1 See pp. 9 seq. , 223 seq. 2 jqi^ 42 \ 

T 



274 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

gradually 'accumulated in mass and importance, until they now 
command the services of a large body of enthusiastic investiga- 
tors. They have gained the ear of the literary world, and they 
enlist the interest of all intelligent persons. The questions of 
Higher Criticism have risen to a position among the great 
issues of our time, and no one can any longer ignore them. 

All great movements of human thought have their prelimi- 
nary and initial stages, and are preceded by spasmodic efforts. 
Even the enemies of the true Faith not infrequently become 
the providential agents for calling the Church to a fresh inves- 
tigation of the sacred oracles. Thus Spinoza, the pantheistic 
philosopher, applied Historical Criticism to the Old Testament 
books,^ and concluded that Moses could not have written the 
Pentateuch, and that the historical books from Genesis through 
the books of Kings constitute one great historical work, a con- 
glomeration of many different originals by one editor, probably 
Ezra, who does not succeed in a reconciliation of differences, 
and a complete and harmonious arrangement. The books of 
Chronicles he places in the Maccabean period. The Psalms 
were collected and divided into five books in the time of the 
second temple. The book of Proverbs was collected at the 
earliest in the time of Josiah. The prophetical books are col- 
lections of different fragments without regard to their original 
order. Daniel, Ezra, Esther, and Nehemiah are from the same 
author, who would continue the great historical work of Israel 
from the captivity onwards, written in the Maccabean period. 
Job was probably, as Aben Ezra conjectured, translated into 
Hebrew from a foreign tongue. ^ This criticism was shrewd, but 
chiefly conjectural. It paved the way for future systematic 
investigations. 

Soon after Spinoza, Richard Simon,^ a Roman Catholic, began 
to apply Historical Criticism in a systematic manner to the study 
of the books of the Old Testament. He represented the his- 
torical books as made up of the ancient writings of the prophets, 
who were public scribes, and wrote down the history in official 

1 Tract. Theo. Polit., 1670, c. 8. 

2 See Siegfried, Spinoza als Kritiker und Ausleger des Alien Testament, 
Berlin, 1867. ^ Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament^ 1678. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 275 

documents on tlie spot, from the time of Moses onward, so that 
the Pentateuch in its present shape is not by Moses. Simon 
distinguished in the Pentateuch between that which was written 
by Moses, e.g.^ the commands and ordinances, and that written 
by the prophetical scribes, the greater part of the history. As 
the books of Kings and Chronicles were made up by abridg- 
ments and summaries of the ancient acts preserved in the 
archives of the nation, so was the Pentateuch. The later 
prophets edited the works of the earlier prophets, and added 
explanatory statements. Simon presents as evidences that 
Moses did not write the Pentateuch : (1) The double account 
of the deluge. (2) The lack of order in the arrangement of 
the narratives and laws. (3) The diversity of the style. The 
Roman Catholic scholar goes deeper into the subject than the 
pantheist Spinoza has gone. He presents another class of 
evidences. These three lines were not sufficiently worked by 
Simon. He fell into the temptation of expending his strength 
on the elaboration and justification of his theory. The facts he 
discovered have proved of permanent value, and have been 
worked as a rich mine by later scholars, but his theory was 
at once attacked and destroyed. The Arminian, Clericus, in 
an anonymous work,i assailed Simon for his abuse of Protestant 
writers, but really went to greater lengths than Simon. He 
distinguishes in the Pentateuch three classes of facts, — those 
before Moses, those during his time, and those subsequent to 
his death, — and represents the Pentateuch in its present form 
as composed by the priest sent from Babylon to instruct the 
inhabitants of Samaria in the religion of the land.^ Afterward 
he gave up this wild theory and took the more tenable ground ^ 
of interpolations by a later editor. Anton Van Dale* dis- 
tinguishes between the Mosaic code and the Pentateuch, which 
latter Ezra composed from other writings, historical and pro- 

^ Sentimens de quelques theologiens de Holland sur VHistoire Critique^ 
Amst., 1685. 

2 2 K. 17. In Z.c, pp. 107, 129. 

^ Com. on Genesis^ introd. de Scriptore Pent, § 11. Simon replied to 
Clericus in Beponse au Livre intitule Sentimens.^ etc. Par Le Prieur de BoUe- 
ville, Rotterdam, 1686. 

* De origine etprogressu idol., 1696, p. 71, and Epist. ad Morin., p. 686. 



276 STUDY or holy scripture 

plietical, inserting the Mosaic code as a whole in his work. 
This is also essentially the view of Semler.^ 

These various writers brought to light a most valuable col- 
lection of facts that demanded the attention of biblical scholars 
of all creeds and phases of thought. They all made the mis- 
take of proposing untenable theories of various kinds to account 
for the facts, instead of working upon the facts and rising from 
them by induction and generalization to permanent results. 
Some of them, like Spinoza, were animated by a spirit more 
or less hostile to the evangelical faith. Others, like Clericus, 
were heterodox in other matters. The most important investi- 
gations were those of the Roman Catholics, 

Over against these critical attacks on the traditional theo- 
ries, we note the scholastic defence of them by Huet, a Jesuit,^ 
Heidegger,^ a Calvinistic scholastic, and Carpzov,* a Lutheran 
scholastic. These divines, instead of seeking to account for 
the facts brought to light by the critics, proceeded to defend 
traditional views, and strove in every way to explain away the 
facts and so to commit the Christian Church in all its branches 
against the scientific study of Holy Scripture. 

There were, however, other divines who looked the facts in 
the face and took a better way. Thus Du Pin,^ Witsius,^ 
Spanheim,^ Prideaux,^ Vitringa,^ and Calmet,^^ sought to ex- 
plain the passages objected to, either as improperly interpreted 
or as interpolations, recognizing the use of several documents 
and a later editorship by Ezra and others. They laid the 
foundations for evangelical criticism, which was about to begin 
and run a long and successful course. ^^ 

It is instructive just here to pause by Du Pin, who lays 

1 Apparatus ad libey-alem Vet. Test. Literp., 1773, p. 67. 

2 In his Demonstratio Evangelica., 1679, IV. cap. xiv. 

3 Exercitiones Biblicce, 1700, Dissert. IX. 7. 

* Introduction ad Libros Canonicos Bih. Vet. Test. 2 ed., Lipsise, 1731. 
^Dessert, prelim. Bib. des auteurs eccl., Paris, 1688. A New History of 
Ecclesiastical Writers., 3d edition, London, 1696, pp. 1 seq. 

6 Misc. Sacra, 1692, p. 103. " Historia ecclesiast. V. T., I. p. 260. 

8 Old and Neiu Testaments connected, 1716-1718, I. 5 (3). 

9 Observa. Sacra., 1722, IV. 2. lo Com. litterale, 1722, I. p. xiii. 
11 See Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, 1897, pp. 

36 seq. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 277 

down such admirable rules of literary criticism ^ with refer- 
ence to ecclesiastical books. When Simon raises the question 
why he does not apply these rules to the Pentateuch, he replies 
by saying : 

'^ A man may say, that all these rules which I have laid down, 
are convincing and probable in different degrees, but that the 
sovereign and principal rule is the judgment of equity and pru- 
dence, which instructs us to balance the reasons of this and t'other 
side, in distinctly considering the conjectures that are made of 
both sides. Now this is the general rule of Eational Criticism, 
and we abuse all the rest if we don't chiefly make use of this." ^ 

In this way the difference between Simon and himself was 
easily reduced to that between good sense and nonsense. This 
method of settling difficult questions certainly stops debate 
between the parties for the moment, but is far from convincing. 

Before passing over to the Higher Criticism of the Holy 
Scriptures we shall present the views of this master of the 
literary criticism of ecclesiastical writers in his time, respect- 
ing the biblical books : 

" Moses was the author of the first five books of the Pentateuch 
(except sundry interpolations). . . . We can't so certainly tell 
who are the authors of the other books of the Bible: some of 'em 
we only know by conjecture, and others there are of which we have 
no manner of knowledge. . . . The time wherein Job lived, is 
yet more difficult to discover ; and the author of the book, who 
has compiled his history, is no less unknown. . . . Though the 
Psalms are commonly called the Psalms of David, or rather the 
Book of the Psalms of David, yet 'tis certain, as St. Jerom has ob- 
served in many places, that they are not all of 'em his, and that 
there are some of them written long after his death. 'Tis therefore 
a collection of songs that was made by Ezrah. . . . The Proverbs 
or Parables belong to Solomon, whose name is written in the be- 
ginning of that book. . . . We ought therefore to conclude, . . . 
that the first twenty-four chapters are Solomon's originally, that 
the five following ones are extracts or collections of his proverbs, 
and that the two last chapters were added afterwards. . . . The 
book of Ecclesiastes is ascribed to Solomon by all antiquity : And 
yet the Talmudists have made Hezekiah the author of the book, 
and G-rotius, upon some slight conjectures, pretends it was com- 

1 See pp. 96seg. ^l.c, p. 18. 



278 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

posed by Zerubbabel. It begins with these words, The Words of the 
Preacher, the Son of David, King of Jerusalem ; which, may be ap- 
plied to Hezekiah as well as to Solomon : ... we ought rather to 
understand it of Solomon. . . . The Song of Songs ... is al- 
lowed to be Solomon's by the consent of the synagogue and the 
church. The Talmudists attribute it to Ezrah, but without 
grounds. The books of the Prophets carry the names of their 
authors undisputed."^ 

About the same time several Roman Catholic divines, as well 
as Vitringa, took ground independently in favour of the theory 
of the use of written documents by Moses in the composition 
of Genesis. So Abbe Fleury,^ and Abbe Laurent Frangois ; ^ 
but it was chiefly Astruc, a physician, who in 1753* made it 
evident that Genesis was composed of several documents. He 
presented to the learned world, with some hesitation and timid- 
ity, his discovery that the use of the divine names, EloMm and 
Jehovah, divided the book of Genesis into two great memoirs 
and nine lesser ones. 

This was a real discovery, which, after a hundred years of 
debate, has at last won the consent of the vast majority of 
biblical scholars. His analysis is in some respects too mechani- 
cal, and, in not a few instances, is defective and needed rectifi- 
cation, but as a whole it has been maintained. He relies also 
too much upon the different use of the divine names, and too 
little upon variations in style, language, and narrative.^ The 
attention of German scholars was called to this discovery by 
Jerusalem.^ Eichhorn was independently led to the same con- 
clusion.'' But still more important than the work of Astruc 
was that of Bishop Lowth,^ who unfolded the principles of par- 

1 I.e., pp. 1-5. 

2 Mceurs des Israelites, Bruxelles, 1701, p. 6. This was translated into Eng- 
lish and enlarged by Adam Clarke. 3d edition, 1809. 

3 Preuves de la Beligion de Jesus Christ, contra les Spinosistes et les Deistes, 
1751, I. 2, c. 3, art. 7. 

4 In his Conjectures sur les Memoires originaux dont ilparoit que Moyse s''est 
servi pour le livre de la Genese. 

^ See Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, 1897, pp. 46 seq. 
6 In his Briefe iiber d. Mosaischen Schriften, 1762, 3te Aufl., 1783, pp. 104 seg. 
■^ Urgeschichte in the Bepertorium, T. iv., 1779, especially T. v., 1779. 
8 In De Sacra Poesi Hehroeorum, 1753, and, 1779, in Prelim. Diss., and Trans- 
lation of the Prophecies of Isaiah. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 279 

allelism in Hebrew poetry, and made it possible to study the 
Old Testament as literature, discriminating poetry from prose, 
and showing that the greater part of prophecy is poetical. His 
work on Hebrew poetry was issued in Germany by Michaelis, 
and his translation of Isaiah by Koppe, who took the position 
that this prophetical book was made np of a number of docu- 
ments loosely put together from different authors and different 
periods.^ Lowth himself did not realize the importance of this 
discovery for the literary criticism of the Scriptures, but thought 
that it would prove of great service to Textual Criticism in the 
suggesting of emendations of the text in accordance with the 
parallelism of members. 

The poet Herder ^ first caught the Oriental spirit and life 
and brought to the attention of the learned the varied literary 
beauties of the Bible,^ and "reconquered, so to say, the Old 
Testament for German literature."* 

But these writings were all preparatory to the work of J. G. 
Eichhorn, in 1780.^ Eichhorn combined in one the results of 
Simon and Astruc, Lowth and Herder, embracing the various 
elements in an organic method which he called the Higher Criti- 
cism, In the preface to his second edition, 1787, he says: 

1 Koppe, Bohert LovjtWs Jesaias neu ubersetzt nebst einer Einleitung . . . 
mlt Zusatze und Anmerkungen, 4 Bd,, Leipzig, 1779-1780. 

2 In 1780 he published his Briefe uber das Studium der Theologie, and in 
1782 his Geist der Heh. Poesie. 

3 Herder in his first Brief says : " Richard Simon is the Eather of the Criticism 
of the Old and New Testaments in recent times." "A Critical Introduction to 
the Old Testament, as it ought to be, we have not yet." 1780. In 2d Auf., 
1785. It is said on the margin, " We have it now in Eichhorn's valuable JEin- 
leit. ins Alt. Test., 1780-1783." 

* Dorner in Johnson's Bncyclopoedia, 11. p. 528. 

^ Einleit. ins Alt. Test. As Bertheau remarks in Herzog's Beal Ency., 1. 
Aufl., IV. 115: "In Eichhorn's writings the apologetic interest is everj^where 
manifest, to explain, as he expresses it, the Bible according to the ideas and 
methods of thought of the ancient world, and to defend it against the scorn of the 
enemies of the Bible. He recognized the exact problem of his times clearer than 
most of his contemporaries ; he worked with unwearied diligence over the whole 
field of Biblical literature with his own independent powers ; he paved the way 
to difficult investigations ; he undertook many enterprises with good success, and 
conducted not a few of them to safe results. With Herder in common he has 
the credit of having awakened in wide circles love to the Bible, and especially 
the Old Testament writings, and excited enthusiasm carefully to investigate 
them." 



280 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

'■I am obliged to give the most pains to a hitherto entirely un- 
worked field, the investigation of the internal condition of the 
particular writings of the Old Testament by help of the Higher 
Criticism (a new name to no Humanist). Let any one think what 
they will of these efforts, my own consciousness tells me that they 
are the result of very careful investigation, although no one can 
be less wrapt up in them than I their author. The powers of one 
man hardly suffice to complete such investigations so entirely at 
once. They demand a healthful and ever-cheerful spirit, and how 
long can any one maintain it in such toilsome investigations ? 
They demand the keenest insight into the internal condition of 
every book ; and who will not be dulled after a while ? " 

He begins his investigation of the books of Moses with the 
wise statement: 

" Whether early or late ? That can be learned only from the 
writings themselves. And if they are not by their own contents 
or other internal characteristic traces put down into a later cen- 
tury than they ascribe to themselves or Tradition assigns them, 
then a critical investigator must not presume to doubt their own 
testimony — else he is a contemptible raisonneur, a doubter in the 
camp, and no longer an historical investigator. According to this 
plan I shall test the most ancient Hebrew writings, not troubling 
myself what the result of this investigation may be. And if 
therewith learning, shrewdness, and other qualifications which I 
desire for this work should fail me, yet, certainly no one will find 
lacking love of the truth and strict investigation." 

These are the principles and methods of a true and manly 
scholar, the father of the Higher Criticism. It is a sad reflec- 
tion that they have been so greatly and generally ignored on 
the scholastic and rationalistic sides. Eichhorn separated the 
Elohistic and Jehovistic documents in Genesis with great pains, 
and with such success that his analysis has been the basis of all 
critical investigation since his day. Its great advantages are 
admirably stated: 

" For this discovery of the internal condition of the first books 
of Moses, party spirit will perhaps for a pair of decennials snort 
at the Higher Criticism instead of rewarding it with the full 
thanks that are due it, for (1) the credibility of the book gains by 
such a use of more ancient documents. (2) The harmony of the 
two narratives at the same time with their slight deviations proves 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 281 

their independence and mutual reliability. (3) Interpreters will 
be relieved of difficulty by this Higher Criticism which separates 
document from document. (4) Finally the gain of Criticism is 
also great. If the Higher Criticism has now for the first distin- 
guished author from author, and in general characterized each 
according to his own ways, diction, favorite expressions, and other 
peculiarities, then her lower sister who busies herself only with 
words, and spies out false readings, has rules and principles by 
which she must test particular readings." ^ 

Eichhorn carried his methods of Higher Criticism into the 
entire Old Testament with the hand of a master, and laid 
the foundation of views that have been maintained ever since 
with increasing determination. He did not always grasp the 
truth. He sometimes chased shadows, and framed visionary 
theories both in relation to the Old and New Testaments, like 
others who have preceded him and followed him. He could 
not transcend the limits of his age, and adapt himself to future 
discoveries. The labours of a large number of scholars, and the 
work of a century and more, were still needed, as Eichhorn 
modestly anticipated. 

These discussions produced little impression upon Great 
Britain. The conflict with deism had forced the majority of 
her divines into a false position. If they had maintained the 
fides divina and the critical position of the Protestant Reformers 
and Westminster divines, they would not have hesitated to 
look the facts in the face, and strive to account for them ; they 
would not have committed the grave mistakes by which bib- 
lical learning was almost paralyzed in Great Britain for half 
a century.2 Eager for the defence of traditional views, they, 

1 In ?.c., 11. p. 329; see also Urgeschichte in Bepertorium, 1770, V. p. 187. 
"We cannot help calling attention to the fine literary sense of Eichhorn as 
manifest in the following extract: "Read it (Genesis) as two historical works 
of antiquity, and breathe thereby the atmosphere of its age and country. 
Forget then the century in which thou livest and the knowledge it affords thee ; 
and if thou canst not do this, dream not that thou wilt be able to enjoy the 
book in the spirit of its origin." 

2 Mozley in his Reminiscences, 1882, Am. edit.. Vol. 11. p. 41, says: "There 
was hardly such a thing as Biblical Criticism in this country at the beginning 
of this century. Poole's Synopsis contained all that an ordinary clergyman 
could wish to know. Arnold is described as in all his glory at Rugby, with 
Poole's Synopsis on one side, and Facciolati on the other." 



282 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

for the most part, fell back again on Jewish Rabbinical authority 
and external evidence, contending with painful anxiety for 
authors and dates ; and so antagonized Higher Criticism itself 
as deistic criticism and rationalistic criticism, not discrimi- 
nating between those who were attacking the Scriptures in 
order to destroy them, and those who were searching the 
Scriptures in order to defend them. It is true that the 
humanist and the purely literary interest prevailed in Eich- 
horn and his school ; they failed to apply the fides divina of 
the Protestant Reformers ; but this was lacking to the scho- 
lastics also, and so unhappily traditional dogmatism and ration- 
alistic criticism combined to crush evangelical criticism. 

YI. The Highek Ceiticis:\i of the ISTinetebxth Centuby 

There is a notable exception to the absence of the critical 
spirit in Great Britain, and that exception proves the rule. In 
1792 Dr. Alexander Geddes, a Roman Catholic divine, pro- 
posed what has been called the fragmentary hypothesis to 
account for the structure of the Pentateuch and Joshua.^ 
But this radical theory found no hospitality in Great Britain. 
It passed over into Germany through yater,^ and there entered 
into conflict with the documentary hypothesis of the school of 
Eichhorn. Koppe had proposed the fragmentary hypothesis 
to account for the literary features of the book of Isaiah, and 
now it was extended to other books of the Bible. Eichhorn 
had applied the documentary hypothesis to the Gospels, Isaiah, 
and other parts of Scripture. The first stadium of the Higher 
Criticism is characterized by the conflict of the documentary 
and fragmentary hypotheses along the whole line. The result 
of this discussion was that the great variety of the elements 
that constitute our Bible became more and more manifest, and 
the problem was forced upon the critics to account for their 
combination. 

1 The Holy Bible; or, the Books accounted Sacred by Jews and Christians, 
etc. London, I. pp. xviii. seq. 

2 Commentar ilber de7i Pentateuch mit Einleitungen zu den einzelnen Ab- 
schnitten der eingeschalteten von Dr. Alex. Geddes'' merkwurdigeren kritischen 
und exegetischen Anmerkungen, etc. Halle, 1805. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 283 

De Wette^ introduced the second stadium of the Higher 
Criticism by calling the attention of the critics to the genesis 
of the documents.^ Gesenius supported him,^ and sharply 
opposed the fragmentary hypothesis of Koppe, and strove to 
account for the genesis of the documents of Isaiah and their 
combination. Other critics in great numbers worked in the 
same direction, such as Bleek, Ewald, Knobel, Hupfeld, and 
produced a great mass of historical and critical work upon all 
parts of the Old Testament. The same problems were dis- 
cussed in the New Testament, especially with reference to the 
Gospels, the order of their production, and their inter-relation.* 
A great number of different theories were advanced to account 
for the genesis of the different books of the Bible. The result 
of the conflict has been the conviction on the part of most 
critics that the unity of the writings in the midst of the 
variety of documents has been accomplished by careful and 
skilful editing at different periods of biblical history. 

It became more and more evident that the problems were 
assuming larger dimensions, and that they could not be solved 
until the several edited writings were compared with one 
another and considered in their relation to the development 
of the Biblical Religion. The Higher Criticism thus entered 
upon a third stadium of its history. This stadium was opened 
for the New Testament by the Tiibingen school, and for the 
Old Testament by the school of Reuss. These entered into 
conflict with the older views, and soon showed their insuffi- 
ciency to account for the larger problems. They reconstructed 
the biblical writings upon purely naturalistic principles, so 
emphasizing differences as to make them irreconcilable, and 
explaining the development in biblical history and religion 
and literature by the theory of antagonistic forces struggling 
for the mastery. These critics were successfully opposed by 

1 Kritik der israelitischeri Geschichte, Halle, 1807 ; Beitrage zur Einleit. , 
1806-1807 ; Lehrb. d. hist. Jcrit. Einleit. in d. Bihel Alten und Neuen Testaments., 
Berlin, 1817-1826. 

■^ See author's article, "A Critical Study of the History of the Higher Criti- 
cism, with Special Reference to the Pentateuch," Presbyterian Bevieiv, IV. pp. 
94 seq. 

^ Com. u. d. Jesaia, Leipzig, 1821. ^ See Weiss, Leben Jesu, I. pp. 30 seq. 



284 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the schools of Neander, Hoffmann, and Ewald, and have been 
overcome in the New Testament by the principle of diversity 
of views combining in a higher unity. The same principle will 
overcome them in the Old Testament likewise.^ 

The Higher Criticism during the first and second stadia of 
its development in Germany made little impression upon Great 
Britain and America. In 1818, T. Hartwell Home issued his 
Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy 
Scriptures^'^ which has been highly esteemed for its many excel- 
lent qualities by several generations of students. His state- 
ment in the preface to the second edition of his work shows 
how far Great Britain was behind the continent at that time : 

" It (the work) originated in the author's own wants many years 
since . . . when he stood in need of a guide to the reading of the 
Holy Scriptures. ... At this time the author had no friend to 
assist his studies, — or remove his doubts, — nor any means of 
procuring critical works. At length a list of the more eminent 
foreign Biblical critics fell into his hands, and directed him to 
some of the sources of information which he was seeking ; he 
then resolved to procure such of them as his limited means would 
permit, with the design in the first instance of satisfying his own 
mind on those topics which had perplexed him, and ultimately of 
laying before the Public the results of his inquiries, should no 
treatise appear that might supersede such a publication." 

This dependence of Great Britain and America on the 
biblical scholarship of the continent continued until the second 
half of our century. Most students of the Bible contented 
themselves with more or less modified forms of traditional 
theories. Some few scholars made occasional and cautious use 
of German criticism. Moses Stuart, Edward Robinson, S. H. 
Turner, Addison Alexander, Samuel Davidson, and others 
depended chiefly upon German works which they translated 
or reproduced. At last the Anglo-Saxon world was roused 
from its uncritical condition by the attacks of Bishop Colenso, 
on the historical character of the Pentateuch and the book of 

1 See author's article, " Critical Study of the Higher Criticism," etc., Presby- 
terian Beview, IV. p. 106 seq. ; also pp. 580 seq. of this book. 

2 It passed through many editions, 4th, 1823 ; 10th, 1856. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 285 

Joshua ; and by a number of scholars representing free thought 
in the Essays and Reviews.'^ These writers fell back on the 
older deistic objections to the Pentateuch as history and as con- 
taining a supernatural religion, and mingled therewith a repro- 
duction of German thought, chiefly through Bunsen. They 
magnified the discrepancies in the narratives and legislation, 
and attacked the supernatural element, but added little to 
the sober Higher Criticism of the Scriptures. So far as they 
took position on this subject they fell into line with the more 
radical element of the school of De Wette. They called the 
attention of British and American scholars away from the 
literary study of the Bible and the true work of the Higher 
Criticism, to a defence of the supernatural, and the inspiration 
of the Bible. They were attacked by several divines in Great 
Britain and America from this point of view ; but their con- 
tributions to the Higher Criticism of the Bible were either 
slurred over or ignored. ^ The work of Colenso had little sup- 
port in Great Britain or America at the time, but it made a 
great impression upon the Dutch scholar, Kuenen, through 
whose influence it again came into notice.^ 

It is only within recent years that any general interest in the 
matters of Higher Criticism has been shown in Great Britain 
and America. This interest has been due chiefly to the labours 
of a few pioneers, who have suffered in the interest of biblical 
science. In Great Britain, Samuel Davidson, Professor of Bib- 
lical Literature in the Lancashire Independent College at Man- 
chester from 1842 to 1857, in the latter year was compelled to 
resign his position in consequence of his views with respect to the 



1 The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua critically examined, Parts I.-VIL, 
1862-1879 ; Becent Inquiries in Theology by Eminent English Churchmen, being 
Essays and Beviews, 4th American edition from 2d London, 1862. 

2 Among these may be mentioned the authors of Aids to Faith, being a reply- 
to Essays and Beviews, American edition, 1862 ; W. H. Green, The Pentateuch 
vindicated from the Aspersions of Bishop Colenso, New York, 1863. 

^ Godsdienst van Israel, 1869-1870, the English edition, Beligion of Israel, 
1874 ; De vijf BoeJcen van Mozes, 1872 ; De Profeten en de profetie on der Israel, 
1875, translated into English, The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel, 1877; and 
numerous articles in Theologisch. Tijdschrift since that time, and, last of all, 
Hibbert Lectures, National Beligions and Universal Beligions, 1882. Kuenen's 
views are presented in a popular form in the Bible for Learners, 3 vols., 1880. 



286 STUDY or holy scripture 

questions of the Higher Criticism, expressed in the second vol- 
ume of the tenth edition of Home's Introduction to the Scripture^ 
1856.1 This stayed the progress of criticism in Great Britain 
for some years. But in the ninth edition of the EncyclopcEdia 
Britannica, there appeared articles on "Angels," the "Bible," 
" Canticles," " Chronicles," and other topics by Prof. W. 
Robertson Smith, which advocated essentially the development 
hypothesis of the school of Reuss, and especially in the direc- 
tion of Wellhausen. W. R. Smith was Professor of Hebrew 
in the Free Church College of Aberdeen, Scotland, where he 
began to teach in 1870. These articles excited the attention 
of the College Committee of the Free Church of Scotland, and 
brought on a trial for heresy in that church. The case of Pro- 
fessor Smith reached its end in 1881, when he was removed 
from his chair in order to the peace and harmony of the Church, 
but acquitted of heresy in the matters in question. Although 
Professor Smith was dealt with in a very illegal and unjust 
manner, this contest gained liberty of opinion in Great Britain. 
His teacher, A. B. Davidson, of Edinburgh, who held essen- 
tially the same views, was undisturbed, and the General As- 
sembly of the same Free Church, in May, 1892, chose Dr. 
George Adam Smith, with full knowledge of the fact that he 
held similar views, to be the successor of Principal Douglas, of 
Glasgow, who had been one of the chief opponents of W. Rob- 
ertson Smith. 

The first to suffer for the Higher Criticism in the United 
States was C. H. Toy, who was Professor of Old Testament 
Interpretation in the Baptist Theological School, at Greenville, 
S.C., from 1869 to 1879. In the latter year he was forced to 
resign because of his views as to Biblical Criticism. In 1880, 
however, he was called to be Professor of Hebrew at Harvard 
University, where he has remained until the present. The 
discussion of the Higher Criticism in the United States began 
for the Presbyterian body, in the plea for freedom of criticism 
in my inaugural address as Professor of Hebrew in the Union 

1 2d edition, 1859 ; Introduction to the Old Testament^ 1862-1863 ; Introduc- 
tion to the New Testament., 1868 ; 2d edition, 1882 ; The Canon of the Bible, 
1876 ; 3d edition, 1880. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 287 

Theological Seminary, N.Y., in 1876. ^ This was received with 
a mild opposition. The subject first excited public attention 
through my article on the " Right, Duty, and Limits of Biblical 
Criticism," published in the Presbyterian Revieiu in 1881. This 
was followed by a series of articles on both sides of the ques- 
tion. I was sustained by Henry P. Smith. W. Henry Green 
defended the traditional theories, and was sustained chiefly by 
A. A. Hodge and F. L. Patton ; S. Ives Curtiss and Willis J. 
Beecher took a middle position. The discussion was closed in 
1883, by articles by F. L. Patton and myself. ^ After the dis- 
cussion was completed, the traditional side was chiefly advo- 
cated by Bissel and Osgood, the side of the Higher Criticism 
by Francis Brown, George F. Moore, J. P. Peters, and F. A. 
Gast. W. R. Harper undertook a discussion in the Hehraiea 
with W. Henry Green. In this discussion Harper, instead of 
setting forth his own critical views frankly and determinedly, 
preferred to set up a man of straw, which he styled the views 
of the critics, for W. H. Green to attack. The development 
of this discussion was unfortunate, for it seemed to identify 
Higher Criticism with the more radical views, and it caused 
W. H. Green and his friends to combat them with an intense 
earnestness, and a zeal for orthodoxy, which disclosed a change 
from their attitude in the discussion in the Preshyterian Review. 
The intense hostility in the Presbyterian body to Higher 
Criticism was due in considerable measure to this discussion in 
the Sehraica. On Nov. 11, 1890, I was transferred, by the 
unanimous choice of the Board of Directors of the Union Theo- 
logical Seminary, to a new chair of Biblical Theology, endowed 
by the President of the Directors, Charles Butler. In the in- 
augural address delivered Jan. 20, 1891, on the "Authority of 
the Holy Scripture," the subject of Higher Criticism was pre- 
sented as follows : 

" It may be regarded as the certain result of the science of the 
Higher Criticism that Moses did not write the Pentateuch or Job ; 
Ezra did not write the Chronicles, Ezra, or Nehemiah ; Jeremiah 

1 See pp. 26 seq. 

2 The Dogmatic Aspect of Pentateuchal Criticism, by F. L. Patton. Critical 
Study of the History of the Higher Criticism, by C. A. Briggs. 



288 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

did not write the Kings or Lamentations ; David did not write 
the Psalter, but only a few of the Psalms ; Solomon did not write 
the Song of Songs or Ecclesiastes, and only a portion of the 
Proverbs ; Isaiah did not write half of the book that bears his 
name. The great mass of the Old Testament was written by 
authors whose names or connection with their writings are lost in 
oblivion. If this is destroying the Bible, the Bible is destroyed 
already. But who tells us that these traditional names were the 
authors of the Bible ? The Bible itself ? The creeds of the 
Church ? Any reliable historical testimony ? None of these ! 
Pure, conjectural tradition ! Nothing more ! We are not pre- 
pared to build our faith for time and eternity upon such uncer- 
tainties as these. We desire to know whether the Bible came 
from God, and it is not of any great importance that we should 
know the names of those worthies chosen by God to mediate His 
revelation. It is possible that there is a providential purpose in 
the withholding of these names, in order that men might have no 
excuse for building on human authority, and so should be forced 
to resort to divine authority. It will ere long become clear to 
the Christian people that the Higher Criticism has rendered an 
inestimable service to this generation and to generations to come. 
What has been destroyed has been the fallacies and conceits of 
theologians ; the obstructions that have barred the way of literary 
men from the Bible. Higher Criticism has forced its way into 
the Bible itself and brought us face to face with the holy con- 
tents, so that we may see and know whether they are divine or 
not. Higher Criticism has not contravened any decision of any 
Christian council, or any creed of any Church, or any statement 
of Scripture itself." ^ 

After the General Assembly had tried in vain to deprive me 
of my chair, through a stretch of authority which the Directors 
of Union Seminary could not either legally or morally recog- 
nize, charges were brought against me before the Presbytery 
of New York. Two of these charges were on the question of 
Higher Criticism, namely : '' with teaching that Moses is not 
the author of the Pentateuch," and " with teaching that Isaiah 
is not the author of half of the book that bears his name." 

The Presbytery of New York acquitted me of these charges, 
not on the ground that I did not hold these opinions, for I dis- 
tinctly asserted these opinions, and gave ample proof of them 

1 The Inaugural Address, Authority of the Holy Scripture^ 1891, pp. 33, 34. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 289 

in my Defence} but on the ground that these opmions did not 
conflict with Holy Scripture or the Westminster Confession of 
Faith. But the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church 
of the United States of America found me guilty of heresy in 
these two particulars, as well as in others,^ in wdiich I held 
either catholic or scientific truth against traditional and modern 
error ; and they suspended me from the ministry until " such 
time as he shall give satisfactory evidence of repentance to the 
General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United 
States of America." 

In the same panic Prof. Henry Preserved Smith was tried on 
similar grounds. One of the specifications in the charges 
against him, which was sustained, was, " He teaches that the 
last twenty-seven chapters of the book of Isaiah are not cor- 
rectly ascribed to him." He was also suspended from the 
ministry in the same year by the Presbytery of Cincinnati, 
which action was sustained next year by General Assembly. 

Thus the Presbyterian denomination in the United States of 
America, under the guidance of Prof. William Henry Green, 
the American Hengstenberg, and others like minded, has, for 
the first time in history, made a determination of questions of 
Higher Criticism, and has decided that it is heresy to say that 
'' Moses did not write the Pentateuch," and that " Isaiah did 
not write half of the book that bears his name " ; the sure 
results of the Higher Criticism accepted by all genuine critics 
the world over, whether they be Roman Catholic or Protestant, 
Jew or Christian. The General Assembl}^ went no further. 
There are other scholars who agree with Henry P. Smith and 
myself, and who remain unchallenged. The General Assembly 
could not prevent Professor Smith or myself from pursuing our 
researches, nor have they stayed the hands of other scholars. 
They have simply committed the Presbyterian body to a false 
position. 

The more recent work of the Higher Criticism has been in 
the detailed work of analysis of the different writings. In the 

1 Tlie Defence of Professor Briggs, 1893, pp. 115 seq. ; The Case against 
Professor Briggs, Part III. pp. 205 seq. 

2 See pp. 615 seq. 

u 



290 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Old Testament, the effort is to find the sources of the Judaic, 
Ephraimitic, Deuteronomic, and Priestly authors in earlier doc- 
uments of the same type, J^'^ E^'^, D^'^ P^"^, and, in this way, 
push back to primitive times ; and to trace out the documents 
of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, and to ascertain how far they 
resemble or are the same as the documents of the Hexateuch. It 
seems to be evident that there were groups of earlier Ephraim- 
itic and Judaic writers, and that these were followed by groups 
of Deuteronomic and Priestly writers, and that the composition 
of the historical books of the Old Testament was a much more 
elaborate affair than the earlier critics supposed. The same is 
true of the Gospels. The use of the primitive Gospel of Mark 
and the Logia of Matthew by our Matthew is now well assured. 
The use of other sources is also under investigation. The work 
of Luke, in his use of various sources in the Gospel and the 
book of Acts, is a burning question of New Testament criti- 
cism, especially in view of the recent theory of Blass, that the 
Western text represents an original, independent edition of the 
work of Luke.^ 

I have myself, in recent years, endeavoured to show five dif- 
ferent archaeological sources of Hebrew Law, in the Words, 
Statutes, Judgments, Commands, and Laws.^ I have also 
endeavoured to use the references in the Gospels to the words of 
Jesus, and recover the original gnomic poetry in which he 
uttered his wisdom. ^ 

The Old Testament prophets have been analyzed in detail, 
especially the former prophets, by Wellhausen, Driver, Moore, 
and H. P. Smith, and the later prophets by Cheyne, Cornill, 
and Duhm, to an extent that seems like a return to the frag- 
mentary hypothesis. But they have made it evident that all 
the books of the Old Testament have passed through the hands 
of editors who did not hesitate to make the most radical changes 
in the original, in the adaptation of them to later uses. The 
Writings have also been searched, especially by Toy and Cheyne, 

1 See pp. 203 seq. 

- Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch^ new edition, pp. 242 seq. See also pp. 
560 seq. of this volume. 

3 " Wisdom of Jesus," articles in the Expository Times., 1897. See also pp. 
69, 90, 244, 305, of this volume. 



HIGHER CRITICISM OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 291 

with the result of pushing the whole body of them, in their 
present form, down into the period of the Restoration, and the 
disclosure of editorial changes by successive hands to an extent 
which seems unsettling to those unfamiliar with the details of 
the investigation. The Apocalypse of the New Testament has 
been analyzed with as much attention to detail as the Pseu- 
depigrapha.i The epistles of the New Testament are also being 
searched by criticism, and it is becoming evident that we must 
recognize the hands of editors even in some of them. The 
great questions of criticism have been settled by the consensus 
of all real critics. It now remains, out of the confusion caused 
by the more detailed investigations of a mass of workers, in all 
religious bodies, and in all nations, to organize the results into 
the final system. This much may be said in general, that the 
tendency of all this criticism in detail is to work backwards to 
closer contact with the original authors and the original read- 
ings. When all the work of editors has been removed from 
the discussions, the original stands out in its historical environ- 
ment, with graphic realism and an illuminating authority. 

The literary study of Holy Scripture is appropriately called 
Higher Criticism to distinguish it from the Lower Criticism, 
which devotes itself to the study of original texts and versions. 
There are few who have the patience, the persistence, the life- 
long industry in the examination of the minute details that 
make up the field of the Lower or Textual Criticism. But the 
Higher Criticism is more attractive. It has to do with literary 
forms and styles and models. It appeals to the imagination 
and the aesthetic taste as well as to the logical faculty. It 
kindles the enthusiasm of the young. It will more and more 
enlist the attention of men of culture and the general public. 
It is the most inviting and fruitful field of biblical study in 
our day. Many who are engaged in it are rationalistic and 
unbelieving, and they are using it with disastrous effect upon 
the Sacred Scriptures and the orthodox Faith. There is also a 
prejudice in some quarters against these studies and an appre- 
hension as to the results. This prejudice is unreasonable. 
This apprehension is to be deprecated. It is impossible to pre- 
1 Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 284 seq. 



292 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

vent discussion. The Divine Word will vindicate itself in all 
its parts. These are not the times for negligent Elis or timor- 
ous and presumptuous Uzzahs. Brave Samuels and ardent 
Davids, who fear not to employ new methods and engage in 
new enterprises and adapt themselves to altered situations, will 
overcome the Philistines. The Higher Criticism has rent the 
crust with which Rabbinical tradition and Christian scholasti- 
cism have encased the Old Testament, overlaying the poetic 
and prophetic elements with the legal and the ritual. Younger 
biblical scholars have caught glimpses of the beauty and glory 
of Biblical Literature. The Old Testament is studied as never 
before in the Christian Church. It is beginning to exert its 
charming influence upon ministers and people. Christian The- 
ology and Christian life will ere long be enriched by it. God's 
blessing is in it to those who have the Christian wisdom to 
recognize and the grace to receive and employ it. 



CHAPTER XII 

THE PEACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 

The Sacred Scriptures are composed of a great variety of 
literary products, the results of the thinking, feeling, and act- 
ing of God's people in many generations. Though guided by 
the Divine Spirit so as to give one divine revelation in contin- 
uous historical development, they yet, as literary productions, 
assume various literary styles in accordance with the culture, 
taste, and capacity of their authors in the different periods of 
their composition. Especially is this true of the Old Testa- 
ment, which contains the sacred literature of the Hebrews 
through a long period of literary development. For their 
proper interpretation, therefore, we need not only the religious 
spirit that can enter into sympathetic relations with the authors, 
and through vital union with the Divine Spirit interpret them 
from their inmost soul ; we need not only training in grammar 
and logic to understand the true contents of their language and 
the drift of their discourse ; we need not only a knowledge of 
the archaeology, geography, and history of the people, that we 
may enter into the atmosphere and scenery of their life and its 
expression ; we need not only a knowledge of the laws, doc- 
trines, and institutions in which the authors were reared, and 
which constituted the necessary grooves of their religious cult- 
ure, but in addition to all these we need also a literary train- 
ing, an aesthetic culture, in order that by a true literary sense, 
and a sensitive and refined aesthetic taste, we may discriminate 
poetry from prose, history from fiction, the bare truth from its 
artistic dress and decoration, the fruit of reasoning from the 
products of the imagination and fancy. 

293 



294 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTUEE 

Every race and nation has its peculiarities of literary culture 
and style, so that while the study of the best literary models 
of the Greeks and Romans, and of modern European languages, 
may be necessary to develop the best literary taste, yet in 
entering upon the study of Biblical Literature we come into 
a field that was not influenced at all by any of these, — to the 
literature of a race radically different from all the families of 
the Indo-Germanic race, — one which declines to be judged by 
the standards of strangers and foreigners, but which requires 
an independent study in connection with the literature of its 
own sisters, especially the Arabic, Syriac, and Assyrian. A 
special training in these literatures is, therefore, necessary in 
order to the proper estimation of the Hebrew literature ; and 
criticism from the point of view of our ordinary classic literary 
culture alone is unfair and misleading. And it is safe to say 
that no one can thoroughly understand the Greek New Testa- 
ment who has not made himself familiar with the Old Testament 
literature, upon which it is based. The student must enter 
into sympathetic relations with the spirit and life of the Orient 
that pervade it. 

The literary study of the Bible is essentially the Higher 
Criticism of the Bible. A reader may enjoy the literary feat- 
ures of Shakespeare, Milton, and Homer, without himself taking 
part in critical work, but consciously or unconsciously he is 
dependent upon the literary criticism of experts, who have 
given him the results of their labours upon these authors. So 
is it with the Holy Scripture : the ordinary reader may enjoy 
it as literature without being a critic, but the labours of critics 
are necessary in order that the Scriptures may be presented to 
him in their proper literary character and forms. Biblical 
Literature has the same problems to solve, and the same 
methods and principles for their solution, as have been em- 
ployed in other departments of the world's literature. ^ 

We shall first show how the great lines of evidence used by 
the Higher Criticism should be applied to Hol}^ Scripture, and 
then present the result of that evidence with reference to the 
great problems of Higher Criticism. ^ 

1 See pp. 92 seq. 2 gee pp. 95 seq. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 295 



I. The Historical Evidence 

The Higher Criticism first applies to Holy Scripture the 
historical test. The writings must be in accordance with their 
supposed historical position as to time, place, and circumstances. 

(a) The Book of Comfort, Is. 40-66, cannot belong to the time 
of Hezekiah, but to the time of the exile, as Driver shows. 

" It alludes repeatedly to Jerusalem as ruined and deserted {e.g. 
4426 5^ 5312^ 5-^4^ 5318^ g4iof.) . ^0 ^]^g sufferings which the Jews have 

experienced, or are experiencing, at the hands of the Chaldseans 
(42^2' 25, 4328 [R.V. marg.], 47«, 52^); to the prospect of return, 
which, as the prophet speaks, is imminent (40^, 46^^, 48^°, etc.). 
Those whom the prophet addresses, and, moreover, addresses 
in person, arguing with them, appealing to them, striving to win 
their assent by his warm and impassioned rhetoric (40^^' 2^' ^^, 43^^, 
48^, 50^°^-, 51^' ^2 f.^ 58^^-, etc.), are not the men of Jerusalem, con- 
temporaries of Ahaz and Hezekiah, or even of Manasseh; they 
are the exiles in Babylonia. Judged by the analogy of prophecy, 
this constitutes the strongest possible x^resumption that the author 
actually lived in the period which he thus describes, and is not 
merely (as has been supposed) Isaiah immersed in spirit in the 
future, and holding converse, as it were, with the generations yet 
unborn. Such an immersion in the future would be not only with- 
out parallel in the Old Testament, it would be contrary to the 
nature of prophecy. The prophet speaks always, in the first 
instance, to his own contemporaries ; the message which he brings 
is intimately related with the circumstances of his time; his 
promises and predictions, however far they reach into the future, 
nevertheless rest upon the basis of the history of his own age, 
and correspond to the needs which are then felt. The prophet 
never abandons his own historical position, but speaks from it. 
So Jeremiah and Ezekiel, for instance, predict first the exile, then 
the restoration ; both are contemplated by them as still future ; 
both are viewed from the period in which they themselves live. 
In the present prophecy there is no prediction of exile. The exile 
is not announced as something still future ; it is presupposed, and 
only the release from it is predicted. By analogy, therefore, the 
author will have lived in the situation which he thus presupposes, 
and to which he continually alludes." ^ 

(6) An example of a plausible historical clue to date, is given 

1 Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament., 6th ed., 1897, 
pp. 237 seq. 



296 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

in the Apocalypse of the Bowls,^ which, in its original form, seems 
to have been written soon after the death of Nero. The passage is : 

" The seven heads are seven mountains, 
On which the woman sitteth : 

" (And they are seven kings ; the five are fallen, the one is, the 
other is not yet come ; and when he cometh, he must continue a 
little while.) (And the beast that was, and is not, is himself also 
an eighth, and is of the seven ; and he goeth into Apoleia.) " 

The seven heads of the beast are described by a later editor, 
probably the one who combined the three apocalypses of the 
Sevens, as a series of seven emperors. Five have fallen — 
Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero. One reigns. Some 
think of one of the rivals, — Galba, Otho, Vitellius ; others of Ves- 
pasian, the three really being regarded as usurpers. The seventh 
is not yet come, but when he comes he will reign for a little while. 
The seventh completes the number of seven heads. It is proba- 
ble, therefore, that Harnack is correct in thinking that a later 
editor interprets by inserting the reference to the eighth as the 
beast of the scene, and so finds the beast in Domitian.^ We would 
thus have three different interpretations of the seven heads, — the 
original referring to the seven hills of Eome, written soon after 
the death of Nero ; the editor of the second edition in the time of 
Vespasian referring the seventh to a risen Nero ; the editor of the 
third edition thinking of the eighth emperor as Domitian.^ 



II. The Evidence of Style 

Differences of style imply differences of experience and age 
of the same author, or, when sufficiently great, difference of 
author and of period of composition. Differences in style are 
linguistic and literary. 

1. Linguistic differences may be etymological, syntactical, or 
dialectic. 

(a) Etymological differences are of great importance in dis- 
tinguishing biblical authors. Word lists are given in all the 
chief writings which deal with the Higher Criticism of the 
Holy Scriptures. Thus Driver gives a list of 41 characteristic 

1 Rev. 17. 

2 Nachwort to Vischer, Die Offenharung Johannes eine jiidische Apokalypse, 
1886, s. 135. 

3 Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, 1895, pp. 427 seq. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 297 

phrases of D, 50 phrases of P, and 20 of H. Holzinger dis- 
cusses 125 characteristic phrases of J and 108 of E.^ 

The following two specimens of linguistic usage may suflBce for 
the Old Testament : 

(1) The first person of the pronoun ^^^^ is used in Deuteron- 
omy 56 times. The only real exception is 12^*^, ^i^<"D)l, where the 
reason for the abbreviation is evidently its use with Dl The 
other apparent exceptions in Deuteronomy are due to different 
original documents which have been incorporated Avith Deuteron- 
omy, e.g. 32^^'^^, part of the priestly document; the Song, 321-^3 (st.). 
and 29^ (T)^), where there is a mixed text. This usage of Deuter- 
onomy is found elsewhere only in the song of Deborah, Jd. 5 ; the 
prophet Amos, 10 times (except 4^, ^3i^"D^) ; the Deuteronomic 
redactor of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, save in little pieces ; 
Pss. 22, 46, 50, 91, 104, 141 ; and the prophecy Is. 21i-io, where the 
examples are too few to give us firm ground for usage. The 
shorter form ''Ji^ is used in H and P about 120 times. The only 
exception is Gen. 23*, which is probably due to the use of an 
ancient phrase (cf. Ps. 39^^). This corresponds with the usage 
of exilic writings, as Ezekiel, which uses it 138 times (the only 
exception 36^^ in a phrase) ; Lamentations, 4 times ; and of post- 
exilic prophets, Haggai, 4 times ; Zechariah 1-8, 10 times ; Mala- 
chi, 7 times (except 3^) ; Joel, 4 times ; also the Chronicler, 47 
times (except 1 C. 17^, derived from 2 Sam. 7^; and Neh. 1^) ; Prov- 
erbs 1-8, 5 times ; Canticles, 12 times ; Daniel, 23 times (except 
10^) ; Esther, 6 times ; Ecclesiastes, 29 times. No pre-exilic writ- 
ing uses ^3K exclusively except Zephaniah twice and the Song of 
Habakkuk once (regarded by many critics as a post-exilic psalm) ; ^ 
but these few examples cannot determine usage. The usage of E 
and J differs both from D and P. In J of the Hexateuch ^33^ is 
used 51 times to 32 of "'J^ ; in E, ^^:^ 32 times to 25 of ^:i^. With 
this correspond the original documents of Judges, which use ''^iJ^ 
15 times to 11 of ^^^, and the Ephraimitic documents of Samuel, 
which use ^^^^ 19 times to 10 of "^iX. All these show a prepon- 
derance of usage in favour of ''53i<. Hosea uses each 11 times, 
and the earlier Isaiah each 3 times. Other writers show an in- 
creasing tendency to use ^3^. The Judaic documents of Samuel 

1 Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 6th ed., 1897 ; 
Holzinger, Einleitung in den Hexateuch., 1893. See also Briggs, Higher Criti- 
cism of the Hexateuch., new edition, pp. 69 seq. D stands for the Deuteronomic 
writers of the Hexateuch, P the Priestly writers, E the Ephraimitic writers, and 
J the Judaic writers. See pp. 278 seq. 

2 See T>. 314. 



298 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and Kings use ''iK 52 times to 30 of ^1D3^ ; the Ephi-aimitic docu- 
ment of Kings, ''ii^ 22 times to 2 of ^5J^^ ; Jeremiah, ''JS 52 times 
to 37 of ''D3X ; Is. 40-66, 70 times ^JK to 21 ''iSiJ^ ; Job, 28 times 
''ii^ to 14 ''DJ^. It is evident that three layers of the Hexateuch 
are distinctly characterized by their use of this pronoun, and they 
agree with other groups of literature in their usage.^ 

(2) The shorter form D7 is always used in the documents J and 
P; the longer form DD^ is always used in the law codes of D 
and H. There is a difference of usage in E and the frame of 
D. E uses dS, Gen. 31^^, 42^8, 45'% 50^^; Ex. 4:'\ 1^ (Driver's J, 
Kautzsch's JE), 10^^; Nu. 24^3; but :sdS, Gen. 20^' ^ 31''-, Ex. 14^ 
(Driver's J, Kautzsch's JE), Jos. 24^. This use of 2nS might 
be redactional, but it is not evident. The frame of D uses DD7 
constantly, except Dt. 4" (Sam. codex S^S), 28^ 29^- ^^ (phrase 
from Jeremiah) 5 Jos. ll^'^ (phrase of E and P), 14^ (elsewhere in 
this phrase 112 7). It is evident that this difference in the docu- 
ments of the Hexateuch is not accidental, but is characteristic of 
literary preference and of periods of composition, for it corre- 
sponds with the usage of the literature elsewhere, (a) The form 
^ is used in the earliest poetical literature, Ex. 15 ; Judges 5 ; 
1 Sam. 2 ; the earliest prophets, Amos, Hosea, Is. 15, Zech. 9-11, 
and the Judaic and Ephraimitic sources of the prophetic histories. 
This corresponds with the usage of J. (h) The form 2D7 is 
used in the earlier Is. 11 times (D^ only 6^^, 29^^, possibly scribal 
errors) ; in Zeph. 1^, 2^^ (D^ 3^^, scribal error) ; and the Deuter- 
onomic redaction of the prophetic histories. This corresponds 
with the usage of D. (c) Nahum uses D^b 2^, dS 2^^, but Jere- 
miah, Ezekiel, the second Isaiah, and Job prefer D7, but occa- 
sionally use DD7. This corresponds with the usage of E. (d) Is. 
13-14^^ ; Jer. 50-51 ; Haggai ; Zech. 1-8 (except 7^-) ; Jonah ; Joel ; 
Ps. 78, 90, 104, use 3sS- This corresponds with the usage of 
H. (e) Lamentations (except 3^^) ; Is. 24-27, 34-35 ; Malachi ; 
Obad. ; Zech. 12-14 ; Memorials of Ezra and Nehemiah, use D7. 
This corresponds with P. So do Proverbs (except 4P-, 6^) ; the 
Psalter, with few exceptions ; Puth, Estjier, Ecclesiastes (except 
9^), and Canticles. (/) The Chronicler and Daniel use '2^2^, but 
there are a few examples of ^, chiefly in set phrases. When 
one considers how easy it was for an editor or scribe to exchange 
D^ and DD7, it is remarkable that the difference in usage has 
been so well preserved.^ (See my article 'zh, DDT', in the new 
Hebrew Lexicon.) 

1 Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch^ new edition, 1897, pp. 70, 71. 

2 Briggs, I.e., pp. 256, 257. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 299 

In the New Testament each writer has also his stock of words. 
These are given by Vincent.^ For example, take the words 
" father '^ and "church." 

(3) Apart from the Prologue, the Gospel of John uses Father, 
of God as the Father of the Messianic Son from heaven; and 
only in a single passage, of God as the Father of men. In this 
latter passage, 20^'', Jesus says to the woman, " I ascend unto My 
Father and your Father." Westcott^ claims 4:'^^'', 545,46,65^ 1029,32^ 
12^6, 14^' 8^ 15'% 1623.26.27 for ti^e Fatherhood of men. But there is 
nothing in the context of any of these passages to constrain us to 
think of the Fatherhood of men. In several of them the refer- 
ence to the Son, in the context, suggests the i^revailing usage. 
In others, while it is possible to think of the Fatherhood of men, 
that mere possibility cannot resist the overwhelming usage of 
this gospel. 6 Trarrjp is used 79 times of God ; 6 Traryp julov, 25 
times ; Trarep, 9 times ; 6 Trarrjp aov, 8^^ ; 6 ^cov TraTYjp, 6^^ ; Trarrjp tStog, 
5}^ In the Synoptic Gospels God's Fatherhood of men seems to 
come from the Logia. In Mark it is found only in 112^ = Mt. 
014,15^ where the phrase is evidently a logion, and the use of 
6 iv rots ovpavoLs suggests an assimilation of this passage to Mat- 
thew. It is found in Luke, apart from passages parallel with 
Matthew, only 12^2^ which is also probably from the Logia. But 
God's Fatherhood of the Messiah is in all the Gospels : Mk. 8^ = 
Mt. 16^7 = Lk. 9^^; Mk. 13^2 ^ ]yi;^_ 24^6; Mt. 26^^ = Lk. 22^; Mt. 
1125-27 = Lk. 10^1' 22; bcsldcs lu Lk. S% 2229, 2949^ and in Matthew 
with 6 ovpdvLos 15^3, 18^; with 6 iv (rots) ovpavoL<s 7 times and 
without 7 times. It is evident that the use of " heavenly " and 
"who (is) in heaven" comes from Matthew, and not from Jesus 
Himself; just as Matthew uses kingdom of heaven for the original 
kingdom of God.^ 

(4) Church is used in the Gospels only Mt. 16^^, where it is 
probably not original, ^ and twice Mt. 18^^^, where it probably re- 
ferred to the brethren or brotherhood, or possibly to the local 
assembly after the usage of the Septuagint. It is not used in the 
epistles of Peter, of Jude, or in the first or second epistles of 
John. It is used in the Epistle of Jas. 5^*, of the local assembly 
with its elders, which is virtually the same as synagogue. It is 
used in the Eevelation in the prologue and in the epistles to the 
seven churches in Asia, l^-S^^, 19 times, elsewhere only in the 
epilogue 22^^, always of local assemblies. It is used in the third 
Epistle of John thrice of the local church. It is used in the 

1 Word Studies, 1887-1890. ^ Briggs, 3Iessiah of the Gospels, p. 274. 

2 Epistles of John, p. 31. * Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, p. 190. 



300 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

epistles of Paul : Eomans, 5 times ; Corinthians, 31 times ; Gala- 
tians, 3 times ; Ephesians, 9 times ; Philippians, 2 times ; Colossians, 
4 times; Thessalonians, 4 times ;^ Timothy, 3 times; Philemon, 
once; in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 times; in the historical 
sections of the book of Acts, 22 times, three of which refer to a 
Greek assembly. The Church of the Lord is used Acts 20^ 
only, but the Church of God is used by Paul six times in the 
earlier epistles. In the epistles of the imprisonment Church is 
used alone, without qualification. But in the Pastoral Epistles 
the Church of the living God is used, 1 Tim. 3^^, and the Church 
of God, 1 Tim. 3^. 

(6) Syntactical differences. The Hebrew language is strict 
in its use of the Waw consecutive, in the earlier period of the 
language. In the book of Ezekiel, the Waw consecutive of the 
imperfect is often neglected, and the simple Waw with the per- 
fect is used instead. In the exilic prophecy Isaiah, 40-66, the 
Waw consecutive of the perfect is neglected, and the simple 
Waw with the imperfect is used instead. In the book of Eccle- 
siastes the Waw consecutive has well-nigh passed out of use. 
This shows three stages of syntactical development of the He- 
brew language, and enables us to arrange the different writings 
in accordance therewith. 

((?) There are dialectic diffe7'ences in the Old Testament. 
There were doubtless three dialects in the Biblical Hebrew, — 
the Ephraimitic, the Judaic, and the Perean. An example of 
the Perean may be found in the main stock of the book of Job, 
which tends towards Arabisms. The Ephraimitic dialect was 
from the earliest times tending in an Aramaic direction. It is 
represented in the Ephraimitic sections of the Hexateuch and 
the prophetic histories. 

2. Differences of style are evident in all of the four Gospels, 
and are carefully defined by writers on the Higher Criticism of 
the New Testament, and by the commentaries. Similar differ- 
ences are noted in the Old Testament between the Chronicler 
and the prophetic histories. It is agreed among critics that 
the Ephraimitic writer is brief, terse, and archaic in stjde ; the 
Judaic writer is poetic and descriptive, — as Wellhausen says, 
"the best narrator in the Bible." His imagination and fancy 
1 Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 81, 82. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 301 

are ever active. The priestly writer is annalistic and diffuse, 
fond of names and dates. He aims at precision and complete- 
ness. The logical faculty prevails. There is little colouring. 
The Deuteronomic writer is rhetorical and hortatory, practical 
and earnest. His aim is instruction and guidance.^ 

(a) A good specimen of the argument from style is given by 
A. B. Davidson in his study of the book of Job. 

"The objections that have been made to the long passage, chap- 
ters 40^°-41^*, describing Behemoth and Leviathan, are briefly such 
as these : that the description of these animals would have been 
in place in the first divine speech beside the other animal pictures, 
but is out of harmony with the idea of the second speech ; that 
the description swells the second speech to a length unsuitable to 
its object, which is fully expressed in chapter 40^^*; and that the 
minuteness and heaviness of the representation betray a very dif- 
ferent hand from that which drew the powerful sketches in chap- 
ters 38, 39. 

" The last-mentioned point is not without force. The rapid light 
and expressive lines of the former pictures make them without 
parallel for beauty and power in literature ; the two latter belong 
to an entirely different class. They are typical specimens of Ori- 
ental poems, as any one who has read an Arab poet's description 
of his camel or horse will feel. These poets do not paint a picture 
of the object for the eye, they schedule an inventory of its parts 
and properties." ^ 

(&) A fine use of the argument from style is given by Bishop 
Westcott in reference to the Epistle to the Hebrews : " The style 
is even more characteristic of a practised scholar than the vocabu- 
lary. It would be difficult to find anywhere passages more exact 
and pregnant in expression than 1^"^, 2^*-^^, 7^^^% 12^^24_ rpj^g ig^^_ 
guage, the order, the rhythm, the parenthetical involutions, all 
contribute to the total effect. The writing shews everywhere 
traces of effort and care. In many respects it is not unlike that 
of the Book of Wisdom, but it is nowhere marred by the restless 
striving after effect which not unfrequently injures the beauty of 
tliat masterpiece of Alexandrine Greek. The calculated force of 
the periods is sharply distinguished from the impetuous eloquence 
of Saint Paul. The author is never carried away by his thoughts. 
He has seen and measured all that he desires to convey to his 

1 Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, pp. 74, 75. 

2 The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Davidson, The Book of Job, 
p. liv. 



302 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

readers before he begins to write. In writing he has, like an ar- 
tist, simply to give life to the model which he has already com- 
pletely fashioned. This is true even of the noblest rhetorical 
passages, such as chapter 11. Each element, which seems at first 
sight to offer itself spontaneously, will be found to have been 
carefully adjusted to its place, and to offer in subtle details re- 
sults of deep thought, so expressed as to leave the simplicity and 
freshness of the whole perfectly unimpaired. For this reason there 
is perhaps no Book of Scripture in which the student may hope 
more confidently to enter into the mind of the author if he yields 
himself with absolute trust to his words. No Book represents with 
equal clearness the mature conclusions of human reflection. . . . 
Some differences in style between the Epistle and the writings of 
Saint Paul have been already noticed. A more detailed inquiry 
shews that these cannot be adequately explained by differences 
of subject or of circumstances. They characterize two men, and 
not only twg moods or two discussions. The student will feel the 
subtle force of the contrast if he compares the Epistle to the 
Hebrews with the Epistle to the Ephesians, to which it has 
the closest affinity. But it is as difficult to represent the contrast 
by an enumeration of details as it is to analyse an effect. It must 
be felt for a right appreciation of its force." ^ 

III. The Evidence of Opinion 

The third great test of the Higher Criticism, is the evi- 
dence from doctrine, opinion, and point of view. Differences 
of opinion and conception imply difference of author, when 
these are sufficiently great, and also difference of period of 
composition. 

(a) There is a different conception of theophanies in the docu- 
ments of the Hexateuch. 

E narrates frequent appearances of the theophanic angel of 
Elohim. J reports appearances of the theophanic angel of Tahweh. 
These theophanic appearances are mentioned in the Ephraimitic 
and Judaic documents of the prophetic histories. But neither D 
nor P knows of such a theophanic angel. When God reveals 
Himself, in the Ephraimitic documents. He speaks to Moses face 
to face, and Moses sees the form of God in the pillar of God 
standing at the door of his tent. In the great theophany granted 
to Moses in the Judaic document Ex. 23^^^, Moses is permitted 

1 The Epistle to the Hebrews, 1889, pp. xlvi, xlvii, Ixxvii. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 303 

only to see tlie departing form of God, and it is represented that 
it would be death, to see God's face. In Deuteronomy it is said 
that the voice of God was heard, but His form was not seen. In 
the priestly document it is the light and fire of the glory of God 
which always constitutes the theophany. How was it possible 
for the same author to give four such different accounts of the 
methods of God's appearance to Moses and the people ? ^ 

(6) There is a difference in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit 
between Isaiah and the great prophet of the exile. 

The doctrine of the Divine Spirit in Isaiah is still the ancient 
doctrine, which conceives of it as an energy of God coming espe- 
cially on heroic leaders of the people. It was to be poured upon 
the Messianic King to endow him with the sevenfold endowment 
for his reign of peace, Is. 11^ ; and without guidance by the Divine 
Spirit apostate children add sin to sin, 30^ ; but in the Great Un- 
known the doctrine reaches a height which has no parallel except 
in the late 139th Psalm. The Divine Spirit endows the Messianic 
Servant in 42^, 61\ and will revive the nation, 44'^ ; it accompanies 
the ministry of the prophets, 48^^ But in Chapter 63^° the Spirit 
is named the Holy Spirit, an epithet used elsewhere in the Old 
Testament only in Ps. 51^1 It is personified beyond any other 
passage in the Old Testament. It is represented that He was 
grieved by the rebellion of the Israelites in the wilderness, that 
He led them in their journeys to the Holy Land, and that He was 
in the midst of them. Thus the Holy Spirit is assigned the work 
of the theophanic angel of the historical narrative of JE, and 
especially as bearing with Him the Divine face or presence as 
in the document J. The Holy Spirit is associated with the 
theophanic angel here, just as in the Book of Wisdom, Proverbs, 
first chapter, the Divine Spirit and the Divine Wisdom are asso- 
ciated. This conception of the Divine Spirit shows a marked 
advance, not only beyond Isaiah, but also beyond Ezekiel.^ 

(c) In the book of Eevelation there are different and distinct 
conceptions of the Messiah in the several apocalypses. The ear- 
liest of the apocalypses seems to me to be the Apocalypse of the 
Beasts, which presents the conception of the Messiah of Ps. 110, 
and which seems to have been composed in the reign of Caligula. 
The second of the apocalypses was the Apocalypse of the Dragon, 
which cannot be much later in time. It presents the Messiah of 
Ps. 2. These apocalypses were possibly combined before they 

1 Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new edition, 1897, pp. 146, 147. 
^ The Defence of Professor Briggs, before the Fresh, of Nevj York, 1893, 
p. 139. 



304 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

were incorporated with the apocalypses of the Sevens. But I 
cannot see any decided evidence of it. The earliest of the apoca- 
lypses of the Sevens seems to be that of the Trumpets, whose 
Messiah is the Son of Man on the clouds of the apocalypses of 
Daniel and Enoch. I do not see any clear evidence of date. The 
next of these was the Apocalypse of the Seals. The Messiah of 
this Vision is the Lion of Judah, and the Lamb who purchased 
men by his blood. The Apocalypse of the Bowls presupposes 
both the Apocalypse of the Trumpets and the Apocalypse of the 
Seals, and must be somewhat later. Its Messiah is the Lamb, but 
especially as the husband of the Holy City, his bride. In ity 
original form it seems to date from the reign of Galba.^ 



IV. The Evidence from Citations 

Citations show the dependence of the author upon the 
author or authors cited. A few examples will suffice : 

(a) In the Psalter Pss. 35^^28^ 40i"^ 70 are essentially the same. 
The problem is to arrange these Psalms in their order of depend- 
ence by citation. Psalm 35 has in its title simply " belonging to 
David " ; ^ that is, it was in the original Minor Davidic Psalter. 
Psalm 40 besides "belonging to David" is classed as a Mizmor,^ and 
was in the Director's Major Psalter. Psalm 70 has "belonging to 
David," was in the Director's Psalter, and besides has a liturgical 
assignment.'' Prom these circumstances the probabilities are in 
favour of the order 35, 40, 70. Psalm 35 is composed of seven 
strophes of five pentameter lines each. Verses ^^-^ constitute the 
last of these strophes. Psalm 40^^^^ has an additional line at the 
beginning and two concluding lines, making thus the last seven 
lines of a strophe of ten pentameter lines. Psalm 70 is equivalent 
to Ps. 40^^^^^ There can be no doubt that Ps. 70 is a liturgical 
extract from Ps. 40. It is possible to think that Ps. 35^^-^ might 
be a liturgical addition. But its originality is favoured by the 
fact that the language, style, and spirit of this strophe are similar 
to those of the opening strophe of the Psalm. There is, however, 
an awkward break, and the transition is not easy between Ps. 40^^ 
and 40^^ These considerations favour the order 35, 40, 70. 

(6) Buth 2^^ cites in the midst of the prose narrative a bit of 
poetry : 

1 Briggs, The Messiah of the Apostles, 1895, p. 304. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 305 

May Yahweh recompense thy doing ; 
And may thy reward be ample from Yahweh, 
The God of Israel to \^hom thou art come, 
To take refuge under His wings. 

The last line of this extract is from Ps. 91'' : 

And under His wings shalt thou take refuge. 

The exact words ^ are found nowhere else in the Old Testament, 



although the idea of seeking refuge under the wings of Yahweh 
is a favourite idea of post-exilic psalmists. This extract from a 
post-exilic Psalm shows that the book of Ruth is post-exilic also. 

(c) Jonah 2-"^ contains a Psalm. This Psalm has two complete 
strophes concluding each with a refrain. These are followed by 
a half strophe without a refrain. This shows that the prayer is 
only part of a longer Psalm that was complete and symmetrical. 
The prayer is also a mosaic from several older Psalms.^ It is 
evident, therefore, that the Psalm of Jonah presupposes all these 
earlier Psalms, and that the Psalm is also presupposed by the 
book of Jonah, which uses only part of it. The only question 
which remains is whether the Psalm was originally used by 
the author or was a subsequent insertion. If it was used by the 
author, the book must have been written some time after the 
restoration. 

(d) We have in the Gospels a large number of parallel passages. 
It is now agreed that both Matthew and Luke cite from the ori- 
ginal Mark. The words of Jesus respecting His kindred may be 
taken as an example. The original narrative is Mk. 3^^"^. 

"And there came his mother and his brethren, and, standing 
without, they sent unto him, calling him. And a multitude was 
sitting about him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother 
and thy brethren (and thy sisters, well sustained A D E F H, etc., 
Tisch., W. H., margin) without seek for thee." 

Matthew 12'^^" gives substantially the same, but varies the order 
of the sentences, and the construction, and condenses. "While 
he was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold his mother and his 
brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him. [And one said 
unto him. Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, 
seeking to speak to thee.] " This clause, bracketed by Tisch., 
thrown into the margin by W. H., doubtless is a later insertion in 
the text. Matthew interprets the object of the seeking as to 
" speak to him." 

1 ra33 nnn non. 

2 Pss. 183-7, 3123^ 428, 592 ; Dt. 3221. 



306 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Luke 8^^^° also condenses : 

"And there came to him his mother and brethren, and they 
could not come at him for the crowd. And it was told him, Thy 
mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee." 
Luke interprets the object of the desire as "to see thee," and he 
interprets the multitude sitting about him as " the crowd." Both 
Matthew and Luke omit the reference to the sisters, which prob- 
ably, through their influence, disappeared from the common text 
of Mark also. 

Mark 3^^^ continues thus : 

" And he answereth them, and saith, Who is my mother and my 
brethren? And looking round on them which Gat round about 
him, he saith : 

"Behold my mother and my hrethren ! 
For whosoever shall do the will of God, 
The same is my brother and sister and mother." 

This is given by Mt. 12^^ : 

" But he answered and said unto him that told him. Who is my 
mother, and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his 
hand towards his disciples and said : 

" Behold my mother and my brethren ! 
For whosoever shall do the will of my father which is in heaven, 
He is mj brother and sister and mother." 

This is then given by Lk. 8^^ in a condensed form : 
"But he answered and said unto them. My mother and my 
brethren are these which hear the word of God and do it." 

Matthew interprets those "round about him" as his " disciples," 
and substitutes for the "looking round on them" of Mark, "he 
stretched forth his hand towards" them. The logion is the 
same, except that Matthew substitutes here, as usual, "my Father 
which is in Heaven" for "God." Luke verifies the original as 
" God." Luke condenses the logion into a prose sentence, but en- 
larges " do the will of God " into " hear the word of God and do 
it," which is characteristic of Luke, but certainly was not ori- 
ginal. In all respects the originality of Mark is assured. 



V. The Evidence of Testimony 

The argument from testimony is so evident, that illustrations 
seem to be unnecessary. In direct testimony it may suffice to 
refer to Jer. 26^^. " Micaiah the Morashtite prophesied in the 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 307 

days of Hezekiali, King of Judah, and he spake to all the people 
of Judah, saying, Thus saith Yahweh Sabaoth : 

" Zion shall be plowed as a field, 
And Jerusalem shall become heaps, 
And the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest." 

This is a direct testimony to the authorship and date and 
historical circumstances of Mi. 3^. It is seldom that we have 
such direct testimony. Usually when there is an}^ testimony, 
it is indirect, as in 2 Pet. 3^^, where there is an equivocal refer- 
ence to the epistles of Saint Paul. 



VI. The Argu^ient from Szle^ntce 

The argument from silence is of great importance in the 
Higher Criticism of Holy Scripture. The first thing to de- 
termine in reference to this argument, is whether the matter 
in question came fairly within the scope of the author's argu- 
ment. ^ 

1. Sometimes the matter did not come within the author's 
scope at all. He had no occasion to refer to it, and therefore 
no evidence can be gained from his silence. The author of the 
Praise of Wisdom, Prov. 1-9, does not refer to the institutions 
of the priest code. He had no occasion to do so. His purpose 
was purely ethical, although he lived in a period when the en- 
tire system of the priest code was in full operation. 

2. The matter did not eome within the author's scope^ because 
there were good reasons why it should not. There is an absolute 
silence in all the Ephraimitic and Judaic writers and prophets 
prior to Jeremiah as to any wrong in the worshipping of 
Yahweh on many high places. They constantly mention this 
worship, never censure it, but allude to it as the proper wor- 
ship, not only of the people but of the prophets and heroes 
of the nation. This kind of worship must have had something 
about it which prevented them from censuring it. It must 
have been right and proper, and they knew of no legislation 
against it. 

1 See pp. 102 seq. 



808 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

3. The matter in question came fairly within the scope of the 
writer^ and there must he good reasons why it was not mentioned. 

(a) The simplest of these reasons is, that the omission was inten- 
tional. Thus in the introduction to the book of Job/ the author 
represents Job as offering up whole burnt offerings for the sup- 
posed sins of his sons. Why were the sin offerings of the priest 
code not offered? If we could suppose, with many of the older 
scholars, that Job was written by Moses before the Law was 
given, the omission would be explained as due to the fact that he 
knew nothing of the law of the sin offering. The same might be 
true if we thought the book of Job written before the priest code 
came into operation after the exile. But if we hold that the book 
of Job is post-exilic, then the omission of the reference to the sin 
offering was intentional, namely, because he wished to put his hero 
in the patriarchal state of society, entirely apart from the institu- 
tions of Israel. There is indeed an apparent incongruity between 
the highly developed ethical sense of one who feared lest his sons 
sinned in their minds, and the offering for their sins the primitive 
whole burnt offerings. 

(6) The omission of reference to the sin offering in Ps. 51, which 
is a penitential Psalm, and which mentions the sacrifices of whole 
burnt offerings and peace offerings, can hardly be regarded as in- 
tentional. The Psalm gives a real experience of the time of the 
author, and it is improbable that he would omit the sin offering, 
if it were then used in connection with the confession of sin in 
order to its removal. It seems altogether likely, therefore, that 
Ps. 51 was written before the sin offering of the priest code was 
enforced in the ritual of worship. 

4. Where a matter is absent from an entire range of litera- 
ture prior to a certain period, it is evident that the matter did 
not constitute a part of public knowledge.^ and, if known at all, 
must have been known to but few. A careful study of all the 
ethical passages of the Old Testament conyinces me that there 
is an entire absence of censure of the sin of falsehood until 
after the exile. The sin of false-witnessing is condemned in 
the Tables ; and also the sin of falsehood, so far as it is con- 
nected with robbery and murder, is frequently and severely 
scourged in the Prophets. But they seem to know nothing 
of the sin of speaking lies as such. Wliat is the evidence from 

1 Job 1-5. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 309 

their silence ? They were altogether unconscious of its sinful- 
ness. The holiest men did not hesitate to lie whenever they 
had a good object in view, and they showed no conscious- 
ness of sin in it. And the writers who tell of their lies are 
as innocent as they. The evidence from this silence is that 
the Hebrews did not, in their ethical development, reach the 
understanding of the sin of lying until after the return from 
exile, and then largely under the influence of Persian ethics, 
which from the earliest times made truth-speaking essential to 
good morals. 

These are examples of the method by which the evidences of 
the Higher Criticism may be applied to Holy Scripture. They 
are constantly applied by scholars all over the world, in all the 
ranges of Biblical Literature. If carefully applied, tested, and 
verified, they lead to sure results. 

We have next to present the results of this evidence vdth 
reference to the great problems of the Higher Criticism. 



VII. The Integrity of the Scriptures 

The first questions with reference to a writing are : (1) Is 
it the product of one mind as an organic whole ; or (2) com- 
posed of several pieces of the same author ; or (3) is it a col- 
lection of writings by different authors ? (4) Has it retained 
its original integrity, or has it been interpolated ? May the 
interpolations be discriminated from the original ? 

1. There are but few biblical writings which can be regarded 
as the product of one mind, as an organic whole. And few 
of these have remained without interpolations which may be 
easily detected. None of the historical books of the Old and 
New Testaments can be assigned here. The only prophetic 
writings which are certainly the products of one author at one 
time are Joel, Jonah, Zephaniah, Haggai, and Malachi. Some 
might add Nahum ; but it seems evident that the first part of 
the prophecy is an alphabetical poem, which had been greatly 
changed before it was prefixed to Nahum. The only one of 
the writings that can be brought under this class is the Song 



310 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 

of Songs, and yet many recent scholars claim that it is com- 
posed of a number of separate love songs. In the New Testa- 
ment all the epistles, excepting Romans ^ and 1 Timothy ,2 may 
be regarded as having few if any interpolations that can be 
certainly detected, although not a few critics find interpola- 
tions in some of them. There are a number of other writings 
in which interpolations of greater or less importance may easily 
be detected, such as Ruth, Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, Habakkuk, 
the Epistle to the Romans, and the Gospel of Maxk.^ 

2. There are several collections of writings by the same 
author. Ezekiel, Amos, Hosea, Micah, and Lamentations * 
have escaped all but minor interpolations. Jeremiah has 
passed through a series of editings, and has many important 
interpolations. Jeremiah and Ezekiel each give a collection of 
judgments against the enemies of the kingdom of God and 
prophecies of restoration and Messianic felicity. Ezekiel's 
name covers only his own predictions. To Jeremiah have 
been appended two anonymous chapters, and a considerable 
amount of historical material has been inserted by the several 
editors. There are also not a few interpolations in the Hebrew 
text that are unknown to the Greek version. 

3. The twelve Minor Prophets are regarded as one book in 
most of the ancient Jewish and Christian catalogues. The 
Baha Bathra represents them as edited by the men of the Great 
Synagogue after the exile. ^ This is a conjecture without his- 
torical evidence. These prophets, in modern times, have ordi- 
narily been treated separately, and their original combination 
has been to a great extent forgotten. Each one of them may 
be tested as to its integrity. The only one about which there 
has been any general questioning is Zechariah. The earlier 
doubts were based upon Mt. 27^ which ascribes Zech. 12-13 
to Jeremiah.^ If that passage be free from error, the section 
of Zechariah in which the citation is contained must be sepa- 
rated from that prophet and attached to the prophecies of Jere- 

1 McGiffert, Apostolic Age, pp. 275 seq. See also pp. 315 seq. of this volume. 

2 McGiffert, Apostolic Age, pp. 405 seq. 

3 See pp. 314, 317. 

4 Some scholars regard Lamentations as a collection of dirges by different 
authors. ^ See pp. 252 seq. ^ See p. 250. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 311 

miah. It is now generally conceded that this cannot be done, 
and that the evangelist has made a slip of memory in citation. 
The integrity of Zechariah has been disputed in recent times 
from literary grounds. Many scholars of the present day attrib- 
ute the second half to one or more different prophets. Others, 
as Wright ^ and Delitzsch, ^ still maintain the integrity of the 
book. The twelve represent different periods in prophetic 
history. 

Amos is the simple yet grand herald of all the prophets. 
Hosea, the great prophet of the northern kingdom, is the sweet- 
est and tenderest, the most humane of all. Micah was the con- 
temporary and co-worker with Isaiah. These three represent 
the earlier prophets. Next comes Nahum, who prophesied 
against Nineveh. The associates of Jeremiah in the age of 
Josiah, were the lesser prophets, Zephaniah and Habakkuk, the 
great theme of the one being the advent of Yahweh in judg- 
ment, of the other, His glorious march of victory. Obadiah 
probably belongs to the exile. The prophets of the returned 
exiles were Haggai and Zechariah, the latter the chief prophet 
of the restoration. But there have been appended to Zechariah, 
by the editors of the Prophetic Canon, two other predictions, — 
one of the time of Hezekiah,^ the other of a much later time 
than Zechariah. The date of Malachi, as indeed his name, is 
quite uncertain, but he was not earlier than Nehemiah and may 
have been later, in the Persian period. There remain to be con- 
sidered two of the prophets, which are in some respects most 
difficult of all. Joel used to be regarded as the earliest of the 
prophets ; he is now commonly considered one of the latest. 
We have no knowledge of the prophet apart from his writings, 
and the contents of these seem, on the whole, to favour a date 
subsequent to Zechariah. Jonah differs from all the Minor 
Prophets, in being narrative rather than teaching. Jonah is 
among the prophets because of the prophetic lesson which the 



1 Zechariah and his Prophecies, considered in Belation to Modern Criticism, 
Bampton Lectures, 1878, London, 1879, p. xxxv. 

2 Messianic Prophecies, translated by S. I. Curtiss, Edin., 1881. 

3 Some scholars think this also is post-exilic, and others that pre-exilic 
material has been worked over by a very late prophet. 



312 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

story unfolds. The story is as ideal as any of the symbols in 
the other prophetic writings. ^ 

The book of Proverbs is represented by the Baha Bathra'^ as 
edited by the college of Hezekiah. This is based upon a con- 
jecture founded on Proverbs 25. It has also been held that 
it was edited by Solomon himself, and indeed that Solomon 
was the author of the whole. It is now generally agreed that 
the book is made up of several collections, and that it has 
passed through the hands of a number of editors at different 
times. ^ I 

There are two great collections of sentences of wisdom, rep- 
resenting different periods of time and different conceptions 
of wisdom, the earlier giving 376 couplets, with 2 appendices 
containing 13 pieces of varying length from 2 to 10 lines 
each ; the latter giving 115 couplets and 12 pieces of varying 
length, not exceeding 10 lines.* There is an introductory 
Praise of Wisdom, in the first 9 chapters, which is a great 
poem of wisdom. There are two concluding chapters in 
which the pieces are of a later and more miscellaneous char- 
acter. There are ascribed to Agur, 2 pieces of 10 lines and 
one of 15. Under Aluqah is a collection of 8 pieces, 4 of 
which are riddles.^ Under Lemuel^ is given a temperance 
poem of 18 lines. The book concludes with an alphabetical 
poem in praise of a talented wife, which is well named by 
Doderlein, the golden A B C of women. ^ 

The Psalter is composed of 150 Psalms in five books. The 
Baha Bathra^ makes David the editor, and states that he used 
with his own Psalms those of ten ancient worthies. It has been 
held by some that David wrote all the Psalms.^ Calvin, Du 
Pin, and others, make Ezra the editor. ^^ It is now generally 
agreed that the Psalm-book is made up of a number of collec- 
tions, and, like the book of Proverbs, has passed through a 

1 See pp. 345 seq. 2 gee p. 252. 

8 Delitzsch, Bib. Com. on the Proverbs, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1874 ; Zockler 
in Lange, Biblework, Com. on the Proverbs, N.Y., 1870. 

* See p. 388. 6 See p. 417. 

6 See p. 418. 7 See p. 383. 

8 See p. 252. 9 See p. 262. 
10 See pp. 247, 277. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 313 

number of editings. Some have thought it to be the Psalm- 
book of the first temple. Others, and indeed most moderns, 
think that it was edited in its present form for the second 
temple. 1 Gratz thinks that the Psalter was finally edited for 
the worship of the synagogue. ^ 

Isaiah is represented by the Baha Bathra as edited by the 
college of Hezekiah.3 Its integrity was disputed by Koppe,* 
who maintained that it was a collection of pieces of various 
prophets loosely associated. It is generally held that the first 
half of Isaiah is composed of groups of prophecies gathered about 
those of Isaiah as a nucleus, and that the second half, 40-66, 
is by an unknown prophet of the exile. ^ 

More recent investigation makes it evident that Isaiah was 
enlarged to be about the same size as Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 
Twelve, by appending a number of anonymous prophecies. 
The chief of these is the great Book of Comfort, Is. 40-66, 
which reflects for the most part the situation of the exile. It 
itself appeared in three successive editions, with different 
themes and different measures of poetry, and did not assume 
its final form until after the restoration, and even then did 
not escape subsequent interpolation.^ This Book of Comfort is 
separated from the earlier collections of prophecies by an his- 
torical section, 36-39, which has been taken from the book of 
Kings and attached to the earlier collection. The earlier col- 
lection is also composite. The great apocalypse, 24-27, be- 
longs to the time of the conquests of Alexander the Great. 
There are not a few other exilic and post-exilic anonymous 
prophecies, such as 12, 13^-1423, 32-35. There are earlier proph- 
ecies used, such as in 22"4, 15-16^^ and there are numerous 
interpolations by the successive editors even in the genuine 
original prophecies of Isaiah.''' 

1 Perowne, Book of Psalms, 2d ed., London, 1870, p. 78 ; 3d ed., Andover, 
1876, p. 63; Murray, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of the Psalms, N.Y., 
1880. 2 (7o„j. zu_ ^. Psalmen, I. pp. 62 seq. See p. 321. 

3 See p. 252. * See p. 279. 

5 Ewald, Die Propheten, Gottingen, 1868, 2te Ausg., III. pp. 20 seq.; De- 
litzsch. Messianic Prophecies, 1881, p. 84 ; Cheyne, Prophecies of Isaiah, 1881, 
II. pp. 201 seq. ; Cross, Introductory Hints to English Beaders of the Old Testa- 
ment, London, 1882, p. 238. ^ Briggs, 3Iessianic Prophecy, pp. 337 seq. 

" Cheyne, Introduction to the Book of Isaiah, 1895. 



314 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

It is evident, also, that the genealogical section, Ruth 4170-22^ 
was appended to the story of Ruth. There is nothing in the 
story as such that looks for such an ending. The story natu- 
rally comes to an end with the birth and naming of Obed, 4l7"'^ 

The Psalm Hab. 3 is commonly regarded by modern critics 
as a later insertion. It has a title, like many of the Psalms, 
*' Prayer of Habakkuk, the Prophet, upon Stringed Instru- 
ments," 1 and a subscription ascribing it to the director.^ It 
also has the selah^ characteristic of the Psalter. It is evident, 
therefore, that this Psalm was originally in the Director's Major 
Psalter before it was attached to the prophet Habakkuk, and 
while in that Psalter received the musical assignment, and also 
the ascription to Habakkuk. It was because of that tradi- 
tional ascription that it came at last to be appended to the 
prophecy of Habakkuk. The Psalm in its present form implies 
earlier Psalms. The last verses, 17-19, seem to have been 
added to the original Psalm for purely liturgical reasons. The 
original Psalm in verses 10 seq. resembles so greatly Ps. TT^^'^i 
that we must infer a use of one by the other. There can be 
no doubt that Ps. 77 uses the Psalm of Habakkuk, for it is 
itself a mosaic of three original separate Psalms or parts of 
Psalms.* 

4. There are interpolations in the Septuagint version in con- 
nection with Jeremiah, Daniel, and Esther. They are also 
found in the New Testament by the general consent of scholars, 
—in Mk. 16^20^5 i^ the Gospel of John 753-8ii,6 i^ the famous 
passage of the heavenly witnesses, the First Epistle of John 5^ 
and elsewhere. We have seen that many scholars of the seven- 
teenth and eighteenth centuries found such interpolations in 
the Pentateuch.'^ They are found by scholars in other books of 
the Bible. 

1 mrJtr by of Hebrew text is doubtless an error for mrJ3 bu of the Sept. 
So the subscription TlS'^JlD^ is a mistake for m3''J3^ of the Sept. 

2 n^3ttb. 3 Ver. 3, 9, 13. 

4 772-4 is a seven-lined trimeter ; 77^-1^ has two twelve-lined trimeters ; and 
7717-21 is a fourteen-lined trimeter. This last piece is in itself incomplete. It 
was partly taken from the Psalm of Habakkuk, and condensed and otherwise 
modified. 

5 See the marginal note of the revisers in the Revised Version of 1881. 

6 Bracketed in the Revised Version of 1881. "^ See p. 276. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 315 

In the New Testament, in addition to the passages already 
cited, one more may suffice. Dr. McGiffert explains the addi- 
tions to the Epistle to the Romans thus ; 

"The brief note of introduction referred to throws more light 
than any of the other sources upon the life of the Ephesian 
church. It is found in Kom. 16^"^. That that passage did not 
constitute originally a part of the Epistle to the Romans seems 
plain enough. It is inconceivable that Paul, who had never been 
in Rome when he wrote his epistle, should not only know per- 
sonally so many members of the Roman church, but should also 
be intimately acquainted with their situation and surroundings. 
There is far less of the personal element in the remainder of the 
epistle than in most of Paul's letters, and yet in this single six- 
teenth chapter more persons are greeted by name than in all his 
other epistles combined, and the way in which he refers to them 
shows a remarkable familiarity with local conditions in the church 
to which he is writing. The Epistle to the Romans comes to a 
fitting close at the end of chapter fifteen, and the disordered state 
of the text in the latter part of the epistle, and the repetitions and 
displacements of the doxologies in some of the most ancient manu- 
scripts, suggests that one or more additions have been made to the 
original letter. On the other hand, while the chapter in question 
seems entirely out of place in a letter addressed to the church of 
Rome, it contains just such greetings, and just such a wealth of 
personal allusions, as might be expected in an epistle sent to Ephe- 
sus, where Paul labored so long and zealously. There are to be 
found in it, moreover, certain specific references that point to 
Ephesus as the place of its destination. Among those to whom 
Paul sends salutations are Epaenetus, the "first fruits of Asia," 
and Aquila and Priscilla, whom he calls his fellow-workers, and 
who, as we know, labored with him in Ephesus during at least 
the greater part of his stay in the city. He refers to the church 
in their house both in this chapter and in his First Epistle to the 
Corinthians, which was written at Ephesus. Among those who 
join Paul in sending greetings are Timothy and Erastus, both of 
whom were with him in Ephesus. It is clear also from 1 Cor. 1^ 
and 16^^*^'^' that the intercourse between the Christians of Ephesus 
and of Corinth was close and constant, and it is therefore not sur- 
prising that there should be others in the latter city at the time 
Paul wrote who were personally known to the Ephesian disciples. 
Finally, it should be observed that Paul's references to the fact 
that Aquila and Priscilla had laid down their necks in his behalf, 
and that Andronicus and Junias had been his fellow-prisoners, — 



316 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

references which, seem to recall events well known to the Chris- 
tians to whom he was writing, — point to dangers and sufferings 
similar to those we know he was called upon to face in Ephesus. 
In the light of such facts as these it is altogether probable that 
we have in the sixteenth chapter of Romans a letter addressed to 
the Ephesian church. It is possible that it is only part of a 
larger epistle now lost, but it is more likely that we have it prac- 
tically complete and in its original form. Just as it stands it 
constitutes a.n appropriate note of introduction and commendation, 
and there is no sign that it is merely a fragment. That it should 
have been attached to the Epistle to the Romans is not particu- 
larly surprising. It was evidently written from Corinth, as the 
Epistle to the Romans was, and at about the same time with that 
epistle. It may have been transcribed also by the same hand, 
and in that case nothing would be more natural than that the 
smaller should become attached to the larger in copies of the two 
taken in Corinth at the time they were written." ^ 

Bishop Perowne gives this testimony as regards the Psalter: 

"It is plain that these ancient Hebrew songs and hymns must 
have suffered a variety of changes in the course of time, similar 
to those which may be traced in the older religious poetry of the 
Christian Church, where this has been adapted by any means to 
the object of some later compiler. Thus, hymns once intended for 
private use became adapted to public. Words and expressions 
applicable to the original circumstances of the writer, but not ap- 
plicable to the new purpose to which the hymn was to be put, were 
omitted or altered. It is only in a critical age that any anxiety 
is manifested to ascertain the original form in which a poem ap- 
peared. The practical use of hymns in the Christian Church, and 
of the Psalms in the Jewish, far outweighed all considerations of 
a critical kind, or rather these last never occurred. Hence it has 
become a more difficult task than it otherwise would have been 
to ascertain the historical circumstances under which certain 
Psalms were written. Some traces we find leading us to one period 
of Jewish history ; others which lead to another. Often there is 
a want of cohesion between the parts of a Psalm ; often an abrupt- 
ness of transition which we can hardly account for, except on the 
hypothesis that we no longer read the Psalm in its original form." ^ 

All these questions are to be determined by the principles of 
the Higher Criticism. The authority of the Bible does not 
depend upon the integrity of particular writings. If the edit- 
1 McGiffert, The Apostolic Age, 1897, pp. 275-277. 2 in ;.c., p. 82. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 317 

ing and interpolating were done under the influence of the 
Divine Spirit, this carries with it the same authority as the 
original document. If the interpolations are of a different 
character, such as are found to be the case in some at least of 
the apocryphal additions to Daniel and Esther, they should be 
removed from the Bible. If the authority of the Bible depended 
upon our first finding who wrote these interpolations and who 
edited the books, and whether these interpolators and editors 
were inspired men, we could never reach conviction as to many 
of them. But inasmuch as the authority of the Bible depends 
not upon this literary question of integrity of writing, but upon 
the Word of God recognized in the writing ; and we prove the 
inspiration of the authors from the authority of the writings 
rather than the authority of the writings from the inspiration 
of the authors, — the authority of the Bible is not disturbed by 
any changes in traditional opinion as to these writings. The 
only question of integrity with which inspiration has to do is 
the integrity of the Canon, whether the interpolations, the sepa- 
rate parts, the writings as a whole, are real and necessary parts 
of the system of divine revelation — whether they contain the 
Divine Word. This can never be determined by the Higher 
Criticism, which has to do only with literary integrity and not 
with canonical integrity. We doubt not the canonicity of Mk. 
16^-^^ although it seems necessary to separate it from the origi- 
nal Gospel of Mark. 

VIII. The Authenticity of the Scriptures 

Several questions arise under this head. (1) Is the author's 
name given in connection with the writing ? (2) Is it anony- 
mous ? (3) Can it be pseudonymous ? (4) Is it a compilation ? 
All these are ordinary features of the world's literature. Is there 
any sound reason why they should not all be found in Holy 
Scripture ? There has ever been a tendency in the Synagogue 
and the Church to ascribe the biblical books to certain well- 
known holy men and prophets. Tradition has been busy here. 
There is no book of the Bible that has not one or more tradi- 
tional authors. And so in all departments of literature, there 



318 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

is scarcely a great name which has not been compelled to father 
writings that do not belong to it. The genuine writings of 
Athanasius, Jerome, Augustine, and Ambrose have to be sepa- 
rated by careful criticism from the spurious ; for example : 

" Of the thirty to a hundred so-called Ambrosian hymns, how- 
ever, only twelve in the view of the Benedictine editor of his 
works are genuine, the rest being more or less successful imitations 
by unknown authors. Neale reduces the number of the genuine 
Ambrosian hymns to ten." ^ 

It is well known that Shakespeare's genuine plays have to be 
discriminated from the large number of others that have been 
attributed to him. Shakespearian criticism is of so great im- 
portance as to constitute a literature of its own.^ Sometimes 
the writings of a well-known author have been, in the process 
of time, attributed to another. We have an example of this in 
the Paradoxes of Herbert Palmer, which have been regarded 
as Lord Bacon's.^ 

To question the traditional opinion as to authorship of a 
writing is not to contest the authenticity of the writing. Au- 
thenticity has properly to do only with the claims of the writing 
itself, and not with the claims of traditional theories. The 
Baha BatJira does not discriminate between editorship and 
authorship.* It is evident that to the scribes of the second 
century the principal thing was official committing to writing 
and not the original writing of the writing. The Talmudic 
statements as to authorship are many of them absurd conject- 
ures. Josephus and Philo, when they make Moses the author 
of the narrative of his own death, go beyond the Bala Bathra 
and indulge in folly. 

The titles found in connection with the biblical books cannot 
always be relied upon, for the reason that we have first to deter- 
mine whether they came from the original authors, or have been 
appended by inspired editors, or have been attached in the Rab- 
binical or Christian schools. Thus the difference in the titles 

1 Schaff, History of the Christian Church, III., 1868, p. 591. 

2 Knight's Shakespeare, Supplemental Volume. 

3 See Grosart, Lord Bacon not the Author of the " Christian Paradoxes.'^'' 
Printed for private circulation, 1865. ^ See p. 253. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 319 

of the several Psalms between the Septuagint version and the 
Massoretic text are so great as to force the conclusion that 
many of the titles are of late and uncertain origin, and that 
most, if not all, are of doubtful authority. ^ 

In considering the question of authenticity, we have first to 
examine the writing itself. If the writing claims to be by a 
certain author, to doubt it is to doubt the credibility and author- 
ity of the writing. If these claims are found to be unreliable, 
the credibility of the writing is gone, and its inspiration is in- 
volved. But if the credibility of the writing is not impeached, 
its inspiration has nothing to do with the question of its human 
authorship.^ 

The Higher Criticism has been compelled by Deism and 
Rationalism to meet this question of forgery of Biblical Writ- 
ings. This phase of the subject has now been settled so far 
that no reputable critics venture to write of any of our canoni- 
cal writings as forgeries. 

IX. Anonymous Holy Scriptures 

There are large numbers of the biblical books that are 
anonymous : e.g. the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, 
Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Jonah, Ruth, many of 
the Psalms, Lamentations, and the Epistle to the Hebrews. 

Tradition has assigned authors for all of these. It is also 
maintained that the internal statements of some of these books 
point to their authorship by certain persons. 

We have seen the traditional theories of Holy Scripture 
embedded in the Talmud. ^ Christian tradition modified these 
in some respects, but the tradition was essentially this : the Pen- 
tateuch and Job were written by Moses ; Joshua by Joshua ; 

1 Murray, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of the Psalms, 1880, pp. 79 seq. ; 
Perowne in I.e., pp. 94 seq. 

2 It may be said that the pseudonym claims to be by the author, whose name 
is given. But in fact the pseudonym itself makes no such claim. It uses the 
name as a fiction, and usually as a transparent fiction. If any one is deceived 
it is his ovra fault or the fault of his teacher. He may be deceived in a similar 
way by any kind of fiction. The pseudonym has never been regarded as forgery. 
See pp. 323 seq. 

3 See p. 252. 



320 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Judges and Samuel by Samuel ; Kings, Jeremiah, and Lamen- 
tations by Jeremiah ; the Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, by Ezra ; 
Esther by Mordecai ; the Psalms by David ; Proverbs, Song of 
Songs, and Ecclesiastes by Solomon ; the Prophets by those 
whose names are attached to the books. Each writing was 
fathered upon a well-known biblical character in whose inspi- 
ration it was supposed we might have confidence. 

The traditional theory ascribes all the Law to Moses, all the 
Psalms to David, all the Wisdom to Solomon. One is impelled 
sometimes to ask why all the Prophecy was not attributed to 
Isaiah or to Jeremiah, according as the name of the one or the 
other preceded the list of prophetic writings. How narrow an 
escape has been made from attributing the whole of Prophecy to 
Jeremiah, may be estimated when attention is called to the fact 
that one of the ways by which the anti-critics try to avoid a 
miss-citation in the Gospels,^ where a prophecy is attributed to 
Jeremiah which was really anonymous, though united with 
Zechariah,2 is by the theory that the name of Jeremiah was 
given as a general title to the whole of the prophetic books, his 
prophecy beginning them in the list of the Baraitha^ the earliest 
classification of books in the Talmud.^ From the point of view 
of the modern scientific Higher Criticism, it is no more absurd 
to attribute all the Prophecy to Jeremiah, than all the Law to 
Moses, all the Wisdom to Solomon, and all the Psalms to David. 
In none of these cases has there ever been any solid ground on 
which such theories could rest. 

Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes of the Wisdom Liter- 
ature are attributed by tradition to Solomon. The only reason 
Job escaped this traditional parentage was probably because it 
was not regarded by the ancients as belonging to the Wisdom 
Literature ; and its patriarchal scenery made it most natural 
for them to think of a patriarchal age, and then easily of Moses, 
who stood on the borders of that age, and belonged to it while 
in the land of Midian before he took the leadership of Israel. 
But among the apocryphal books there is a Wisdom of Solo- 

1 Mt. 279. 2 See p. 310. 

3 See A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, Art. " Inspiration," Presbyterian Re- 
view, 1881, p. 259. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 321 

mon, and, among the pseudepigrapha, a Psalter of Solomon, 
which are cited as canonical by some of the ancient Fathers. 
But the Higher Criticism has shown that the Psalter of Solo- 
mon belongs to the times of Pompey, the first century B.C., and 
that the Wisdom of Solomon belongs to the early part of the 
first Christian century. We are thus prepared to question the 
traditional parentage of the sapiential literature of the Hebrew 
Canon. Ecclesiastes is the latest writing in the Old Testa- 
ment, as shown by its language, style, and theology. As De- 
litzsch says, if Ecclesiastes could be Solomonic, there would be 
no such thing as a history of the Hebrew language. ^ The Song 
of Songs is an operetta in five acts, describing the victory of a 
pure shepherd girl over all the seductions and temptations that 
were put forth by Solomon and his court to induce her to aban- 
don her affianced shepherd. Solomon is not even the hero of 
the drama, but is the tempter of the Shulamite. 

The Proverbs represent a collection of wisdom, the result of 
many centuries and oft-repeated editings. It was gathered 
under the name of Solomon as the traditional king of the wise 
men. 

Thus the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament and of 
the Apocrypha is resolved into a number of writings of dif- 
ferent authors and of different collections extending through 
many centuries until the time of Christ, and preparing the way 
for the jewelled sentences of wisdom of Jesus of Nazareth, the 
wisest of men. 2 

The Psalter is ascribed by tradition to David, partly as author 
and partly as editor. But the testimony of the titles coming 
from the early editors, and the evidence of the Psalms them- 
selves, make it evident that the Psalter contains the psalmody 
of Israel in all the centuries of his development in sacred lyrics 
of prayer and praise. There were several minor psalters repre- 
senting different periods of literary activity; there were several 
layers of psalms representing different periods of lyric develop- 
ment. The present Psalter is not earlier than the Maccabean 
period ; but while chiefly representing the Persian, Greek, and 
Maccabean periods in the history of Israel, yet it also contains 

1 Hoheslied und Koheleth, 1875, s. 197. 2 gee pp. 392, 396, 401. 



322 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Psalms whicli go back to the times of the prophets and the 
kings, and which sprang from the fountain-head of psalmody 
in the tender, tuneful heart of King David himself. No name 
so worthy as David's under which to gather the psalmody of 
the nation which he had started by his impulses in its centuries 
of prayer and praise to God, even if he wrote few, if any, of the 
present Psalms. The Psalter is a synagogue book more than 
a temple book, and therefore it has been found appropriate for 
the Christian worship of the congregation in all times. 

The Psalter of Solomon is a collection of beautiful Psalms 
which was made after the final editing of our Psalter ; other- 
wise, they, like the Psalm appended to the Septuagint text, 
might have found their way into the Psalter itself. 

The tradition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch has been so 
evidently disproved that it is altogether unscholarly for any one 
to hold to this opinion. The Pentateuch has been shown, after 
a century of critical work, to be composed of four great docu- 
ments, which were written in different periods in the history 
of Israel. These four documents have each its own narrative 
and code of law. These narratives and law codes bear traces 
of earlier narratives and law codes, which they have taken up 
into themselves. These earlier narratives contain original 
sources in the form of ancient poetry, legends, genealogies, 
and other historical or traditional monuments. The law codes 
contain various types of law, indicating their source in the 
session of the elders, the court of the judges, the Levites and 
the Priests, or in the prophetic word and divine command. 
Criticism is carefully tracing these back through all their 
varied development in the documents to their fountain-heads 
in their archgeological forms. The gain of this position is 
immense. Instead of the old tradition that the Law and all 
the institutions, civil, religious, and domestic, were given in the 
wilderness of the wandering to a nation who had had an expe- 
rience of several centuries of slavery, and had not yet had any 
experience whatever as a free nation settled in a land of their 
own, these laws and institutions are now seen to be the devel- 
opment of the experience of Israel during the centuries of his 
residence in the Holy Land itself. No one could think of 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 323 

ascribing the Constitution of the United States and all the 
elaborate system of Common and Statute law in Great Britain 
and America, to the Anglo-Saxon tribes who invaded England 
and established the basis for Anglo-Saxon civilization. It 
would be no more absurd than to ascribe the elaborate Penta- 
teuchal codes to Israel of the Exodus. 

The Hebrew Law is Mosaic in that its essential fundamental 
laws were derived from Moses, in that he shaped the legal policy 
of Israel for all times : the institutions are Mosaic because Moses 
established their essential nucleus. All that was subsequent in 
the Law and the institutions was but an unfolding of the germs 
given hy. Moses. But that development went on in the enlarge- 
ment of the law, in the expanding of the institutions, in the 
unfolding of the precepts, in the experience and history of the 
people, until the cope-stone of Mosaism was laid by Ezra, 
the second Moses, in rebuilt Jerusalem and restored Israel. 

We have in Hebrew literature an unfolding through the cen- 
turies of four distinct types: the legal type, beginning with 
Moses, and continuing through all the ages of priestly legisla- 
tion until Ezra crowned the work with the completed Law ; the 
prophetic type, beginning with Samuel and continuing through 
all the centuries until the Maccabean Daniel ; the type of 
psalmody, beginning with David and unfolding until our Psalter 
was finally edited, late in the age of the Maccabees; and finally, 
the type of wisdom, beginning with Solomon and extending to 
Ecclesiastes of the Hebrew Canon, and the Wisdom of Sirach 
and Wisdom of Solomon of the Greek and Latin Canons. 

X. Pseudonymous Holy Scriptures 

Are there pseudonymous books in the Bible ? This is a well- 
known and universally recognized literary style which no one 
should think of identifying with, forgery or deceit of any kind. 
Ancient and modern literature is full of pseudonymes as well 
as anonymes. One need only look over the bibliographical 
works devoted to this subject,^ or have a little familiarity with 

1 Barbier, Dictionnaire des Ouvrages anonymes et pseudonymes, 4 torn,, Paris, 
1872-1878 ; Halkett and Lang, Dictionary of the Anonymous and Pseudonymous 
.Literature of Great Britain, 4 vols., 1882, seq. 



324 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the history of literature, or examine any public library, to settle 
this question. There is great variety in the use of the pseu- 
donyme. Sometimes the author uses a surname rather than his 
own proper name, either to conceal himself by it from the pub- 
lic or to introduce himself by a title of honour. Thus Calvin 
follows the opinion of some of the ancients that the prophecy 
of Malachi was written by Ezra, who assumed the surname 
Malachi in connection with it. Then again some descriptive 
term is used, as by the authors of the celebrated Martin Mar- 
prelate tracts. Then a fictitious name is constructed, as in the 
title of the famous tracts vindicating Presbyterianism against 
Episcopacy ; the authors, Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, 
Thomas Young, Matthew Newcommen, and William Spurstow, 
coined the name Smectymnuus from the initial letters of their 
names. Among the ancients it was more common to assume 
the names of ancient worthies. There is an enormous number 
of these pseudonymes in the Puritan literature of the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries. The descendants of the Puritans 
are the last ones who should think of any dishonesty or impro- 
priety connected with their use. 

Why should the pseudonyme be banished from the Bible ? 
Among the Greeks and Romans they existed in great numbers. 
Among the Jews we have a long list in extra-canonical books, 
covering several kinds of literature, e.g. the apocalypses of 
Enoch, Baruch, Ezra, Assumption of Moses, Ascension of 
Isaiah, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Psalter 
of Solomon. Why should there not be some of these in the 
Old Testament ? It is now conceded by scholars that Ecclesi- 
astes is such a pseudonyme, using Solomon's name.^ It is 
claimed by some that Daniel ^ and Deuteronomy ^ are also pseu- 
donymes. If no a priori objection can be taken to the pseudo- 

1 This is invincibly established by Wright, Book of Roheleth, London, 1883, 
pp. 79 seq. : " Solomon is introduced as the speaker throughout the work in the 
same way as Cicero in his treatise on 'Old Age,' and on 'Friendship,' selects 
Cato the elder as the exponent of his views, or as Plato in his Dialogues brings 
forward Socrates." 

2 See Strack in Z.c, pp. 164 seq., and pp. 351 seq. of this vol. 

8 So Riehm, Gesetzgebung Mosis im Lande Modb, 1854, p. 112, represents the 
Deuteronomic code as a literary fiction. The author lets Moses appear as a pro- 
phetic popular orator, and as the first priestly reader of the Law. It is a literary 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 325 

nyme as inconsistent with divine revelation, — if one pseudo- 
nyme, Ecclesiastes, be admitted in the Bible, — then the question 
whether Daniel and Deuteronomy are pseudonymes must be 
determined by the Higher Criticism, and it does not touch the 
question of their inspiration or authority as a part of the Script- 
ures. All would admit that no forger or forgery could be in- 
spired. But that every one who writes a pseudonyme is a 
deceiver or forger is absurd. The usage of literature, ancient 
and modern, has established its propriety. If it claims to be by 
a particular author, and is said by a critic to be a pseudonyme, 
then its credibility is attacked, and the question of its inspira- 
tion is raised. In the New Testament the Gospel of John was 
thought by some to be a pseudonyme of the second Christian 
century, but this has been entirely disproved. Weiss tells us : 

" There was certainly in antiquity a pseudonymous literature, 
which cannot be criticized from the standpoint of the literary cus- 
toms of our day, or judged as forgery. For it is just the na'ivete 
with which the author strives to find a higher authority for his 
words by laying them in the mouth of one of the celebrated men 
of the past, in whose spirit he desires to speak, which justifies 
this literary form. Quite otherwise is it in this case ; the author 
mentions no name ; he only gives it to be understood that it is 
the unnamed disciple so repeatedly introduced who is writing here 
from his o^\ti personal knowledge ; he leaves it to be inferred from 
the comparison of one passage with another that this eye-witness 
cannot be any one but John. It was Eenan who, in the face of 
modern criticism, said that it was not a case of pseudonymous 
authorship such as was known to antiquity, it was either truth or 
refined forgery — plain deception." ^ 

fiction, as Ecclesiastes is a literary fiction. The latter uses the person of Solo- 
mon as the master of wisdom to set forth the lessons of wisdom. The former 
uses Moses as the great lawgiver, to promulgate divine laws. This is also the 
view of Noldeke, Alttest. Literatur, 1868, p. 30 ; and W. Robertson Smith, The 
Old Testament in the Jewish Church, N.Y., 1881, pp. 384 seq., who uses the 
term "legal"" fiction as a variety of literary fiction. We cannot go with those who 
regard this as an absurdity, or as involving literary dishonesty. Drs. Riehm 
and Smith, and others who hold this view, repudiate such a thought with abhor- 
rence. The style of literary fiction was a familiar and favourite one of the later 
Jews. And there can be no a priori reason why they should not have used it in 
Bible times. 

1 Weiss, Life of Jesus, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1883, I. p. 94. 



326 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The authenticity of the Pauline epistles of the imprisonment 
and the pastoral epistles has been contested in a similar way. 
The Pauline epistles represent three stages of growth in the 
experiences and doctrinal teaching of the apostle Paul himself. 
It is not necessary to think of his disciples as their authors, or 
to descend into the second century.^ The Apocalypse has been 
disputed from ancient times. It has been assigned by some of 
the ancients to a presbyter, John. Recent criticism is more 
and more against placing it with the pseudonymous apoca- 
lypses of Peter and Paul. 



XI. Compilation in Holy Scripture 

The historical books of Kings and Chronicles ^ and the 
Gospel of Luke^ represent themselves as compilations. They 
use older documents, which are sometimes mentioned by name. 
The question then is, how far this compilation has extended ; 
and whether it has been once for all, or has passed through a 
number of stages. Thus the books of Kings refer to books 
of Chronicles which are not our books of Chronicles, and our 
books of Chronicles refer to books of Kings which are not 
our books of Kings. Both of these historical writers seem to 
depend upon an ancient book of Chronicles, — only our book 
of Chronicles has used it in its citation in another book of 
Kings than the one presented to us in the Canon, for it gives 
material not found therein.* The prophetic histories — Judges, 
Samuel, and Kings — represent a number of writers, earlier and 
later, who have worked over the story of Israel in the land of 
Palestine till the exile. Some of these are Ephraimitic writers, 
some Judaic. The final authors were Deuteronomic. The last 
touch to this prophetic history was given by a Deuteronomic 
editor, who reedited them all in a series, early in the exile, 
under the influence of the prophet Jeremiah. 

1 See Schaff, History of the Chnstian Church, 1882, pp. 784 seq. ; Weiss, 
Biblical Theology of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1882, I. p. 285. 

2 1 K. 1141, 1419.29^ 165; 2 K. 118, 823, 2020; 1 Cli. 292^; 2 Ch. 929, i2i5, I322, 
1611, 242T, 2622, etc., 33i8-i9, 3527 ; Neh. 1123. 3 11^. 

4 Noldeke, Alttest. Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, pp. 57 seq. 



THE PRACTICE OF THE HIGHER CRITICISM 327 

The narratives of the Chronicler, in Chronicles, Ezra, and 
Nehemiah, which constituted one book, represent the view of 
the histories taken by a priest centuries later, at the close of 
the Persian or the beginning of the Greek period. His work 
is the ecclesiastical chronicle of Jerusalem, rather than a his- 
tory of the kings or the people. He seems to have used a 
Midrash of the books of Samuel and Kings, which has been 
lost, intermediate between the present prophetic histories and 
the Chronicles. The question arises whether the other his- 
torical books are not also compilations. In the New Testament 
the chief disputes have been as to Matthew and Mark.^ 

The Gospel of Matthew is a compilation, using the Gospel of 
Mark and the Logia of Matthew as the chief sources. The 
Gospel of Luke is a compilation, using the same Gospel of Mark 
and the Logia of Matthew, and also other Hebraic sources for 
its gospel of the infancy, and, possibly also, another source for 
the Perean ministr}^ The book of Acts is a compilation, using 
a Hebraic narrative of the early Jerusalem Church, and the 
" We " narrative of a co-traveller with Paul, and probably 
other sources. The Gospel of John is also partly a compila- 
tion, using an earlier Gospel of John in the Hebrew language, 
and the Hymn to the Logos in the Prologue. 

The Apocalypse is a compilation of a number of apocalypses 
of different dates. ^ The book of Daniel is a compilation in 
two parts, — the one giving stories relating to Daniel, the other, 
visions and dreams of Daniel.^ It is written in two different 
languages, — the Hebrew and the Aramaic. 

The two remaining problems of the Higher Criticism cover 
so much ground that it will be necessary to consider them in 
several chapters. The literary forms will be considered in the 
next chapter, on the Biblical Prose Literature, and the four chap- 
ters that follow on Biblical Poetical Literature. The question of 
credibility will be discussed in the chapter on the Credibility 
of Holy Scripture. 

1 Weiss, Lehen Jesu, I., 1882, pp. 24 seq., gives the best statement of this dis- 
cussion and its results. 

2 Briggs, Messiah of the Apostles, pp. 284 seq. 
2 See pp. 351 seq. 



CHAPTER XIII 

BIBLICAL PROSE LITEEATUEE 

There has been a great neglect of the study of Holy 
Scripture as literature, in the Synagogue and in the Church. 
Few scholars have ever given their attention to this subject. 
The scholars of the Jewish and Christian world were interested 
and absorbed in the study of Holy Scripture for religious, dog- 
matic, and ethical purposes. Even in the development of the 
discipline of the Higher Criticism, the literary forms were the 
last things to receive attention. 

The literary forms have not shared to any great extent in the 
revival of biblical studies. And yet these are exactly the things 
that most need consideration in our day, when the literature of 
Holy Scripture is compared with the literatures of the other 
religions of the ancient world, and the question is so often 
raised why we should recognize the Christian Bible as the 
inspired word of God rather than the sacred books of other 
religions. 

Bishop Lowth in England, and the poet Herder in Germany, 
toward the close of the last century, called the attention of the 
learned world to this neglected field, and invited to the study 
of the Sacred Scriptures as sacred literature. Little advance 
has been made, however, owing, doubtless, to the fact that the 
conflict has been raging about the history, the religion, and the 
doctrines of the Bible ; and, on the field of the Higher Criticism, 
in questions of authenticity, integrity, and credibility of writ- 
ings. The finer literary features have not entered into the field 
of discussion, to any extent, until quite recent times. De Wette, 
Ewald, and especially Reuss, made valuable contributions to 
this subject, but even these masters have given their strength 
to other topics. 

328 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 329 

Tlie most obvious divisions of literature are poetry and prose. 
These are distinguished to the eye by different modes of writ- 
ing, and to the ear by different modes of reading ; but under- 
neath all this is a difference of rhythmical movement. It is 
difficult to draw the line scientifically between poetry and prose 
even here, for " Prose has its rhythms, its tunes, and its tone- 
colors, like verse ; and, while the extreme forms of prose and 
verse are sufficiently unlike each other, there are such near grades 
of intermediate forms, that they may be said to run into each 
other, and any line claiming to be distinctive must necessarily 
be more or less arbitrary."^ Hence rhetorical prose and 
works of the imagination in all languages approximate closely 
to poetry. The poetry of the Bible is written in the manu- 
scripts, and is printed in the Hebrew and Greek texts, as well 
as in the versions, with few exceptions, exactly as if it were 
prose ; and the Hebrew scribes, who divided the Old Testa- 
ment Scriptures and pointed them with vowels and accents, 
dealt with the poetry as if it were prose, and even obscured the 
poetic form by their divisions of verse and section, so that in 
many cases it can be restored only by a careful study of the 
unpointed text and a neglect of the Massoretic sections. 

The subject of Biblical Poetry is reserved for the following 
chapters. In this chapter the Prose Literature of the Bible 
will be considered. This is found in rich variety. 



I. Historical Prose 

History constitutes a very large portion of the Old and New 
Testaments. In the Old Testament there are different kinds 
of history : the priestly and the prophetic. The priestly is 
represented by Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and extends 
backwards into the priestly sections of the Pentateuch. It is 
characterized by the annalistic style, using older sources, such 
as genealogical tables, letters, official documents, and entering 
into the minute details of the Levitical system and the organi- 
zation of the State, but destitute of imagination and of the 

^ Lanier, Science of English Verse, N.Y., 1880, p. 57. 



330 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

artistic sense. The prophetic is represented by three different 
strata of the books of Samuel and Kings, Joshua and Judges, and 
the Pentateuch. The earliest of these, the Ephraimitic, is char- 
acterized by a graphic realistic style, using ancient stories, 
traditions, poetic extracts, and entire poems. The Judaic writ- 
ing is more artistic, giving fewer earlier documents but working 
over the material into an organic whole. It uses the imagina- 
tion freely, and with fine aesthetic taste and tact.^ The Deu- 
teronomic writers use the history merely for the great prophetic 
lessons they find wrapt up in it. 

In the New Testament we have four biographical sketches of 
the noblest and most exalted person who has ever appeared in 
history, Jesus Christ, in their variety giving us memoirs in four 
distinct types. ^ 

The Gospel of Mark is graphic, plastic, and realistic, based 
on the reports of the eye-witnesses, and is nearest to the person 
and life of our Lord. It uses no other written source than the 
original Logia of Matthew, which it cites rarely for special say- 
ings of Jesus. The Gospel of Matthew uses the Logia and Mark, 
and also oral tradition, in order to set forth Jesus as the Mes- 
siah of the Jews. The Gospel of Luke uses the Logia and 
Mark, and other written as well as oral sources to represent 
Jesus as the Saviour of sinners. The Gospel of John uses an 
original memoir of the apostle John, and sets the person and 
life of Jesus, as therein described by an intimate friend, in the 
additional light of the total experience of the apostolic Church, 
and sees Jesus in the halo of religious, philosophic reflection 
from the point of view of the Messiah, the enthroned Son of 
the Father. 

The book of Acts presents the history of the planting and 
training of the Christian Church, using especially a Hebraic 
source for the story of Peter and the Church of Jerusalem, and 
the story of a companion of Paul in his missionary journeys, 
organizing the material into the second part of a work which 
began with the life of Jesus, and was possibly designed to be 

1 Dillmann, Genesis, 4te. Aufl., Leipzig, 1882, pp. xi seq.; Noldeke, Alttest. 
Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, pp. 15 seq. 

2 Weiss, Leben Jesu, Berlin, 1882, I. p. 103. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 331 

followed by a third work giving the story of the Church in 
Rome, which the author did not live to write. ^ 

All these forms of history and biography use the same va- 
riety of sources as histories in other ancient literature. Their 
historical material was not revealed to the authors by the 
Divine Spirit, but was gathered by their own industry as his- 
torians from existing material and sources of information. 
The most that we can claim for them is that they were in- 
spired by God in their work, so that they were guided into 
truth and preserved from error as to all matters of religion, 
faith, and morals ; but to what extent further in the details 
and external matters of their composition has to be determined 
by historical criticism. It is necessary also to consider to what 
extent their use of sources was limited by inspiration, or, in 
other words, what kinds of sources were unworthy of the use 
of inspired historians. There are those who would exclude 
the legend and the myth, which are found in all other ancient 
history. If the legend in itself implies what is false, it would 
certainly be unworthy of divine inspiration to use it ; but if it 
is the poetical embellishment of bare facts, one does not readily 
see why it should be excluded from the sacred historians' 
sources any more than snatches of poetry, bare genealogical 
tables, and records often fragmentary and incomplete, such as 
are certainly found in the historical books. If the myth neces- 
sarily implies in itself polytheism or pantheism, or any of the 
elements of false religions, it would be unworthy of divine 
inspiration. It is true that the classic myths which lie at the 
basis of the history of Greece and Rome, with which all stu- 
dents are familiar, are essentially polytheistic ; but not more 
so than the religions of these peoples and all their literature. 
It is also true that the myths of Assyria and Babylon as re- 
corded on their monuments are essentially polytheistic. Many 
scholars have found such myths in the Pentateuch. But over 
against this there is the striking fact that stands out in the 
comparison of the biblical narratives of the creation and the 
flood with the Assyrian and Babylonian ; namely, that the bib- 
lical are monotheistic, the Assyrian polytheistic. But is there 
iSee Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 3d edit., 1898, pp. 27, 28. 



332 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

not a monotheistic myth as well as a polytheistic? In other 
words, may not the literary form of the myth be appropriate 
to monotheistic, as well as to polytheistic, conceptions? May 
it not be an appropriate literary form for the true biblical 
religion as well as for the other ancient religions of the world ?^ 
These questions cannot be answered a priori. They are 
questions of fact. The term "myth" has become so associated 
with polytheism in usage and in the common mind that it is 
difficult to use it in connection with the pure monotheism and 
supernatural revelation of the Bible without misconception. 
No one should use it unless he carefully makes the necessary 
discriminations. For the discrimination of the religion of the 
Bible from the other religions must ever be more important 
than their comparison and features of resemblance. There can 
be little objection to the term " legend," ^ which in its earliest 
and still prevalent use has a religious sense, and can cover 
without difficulty most if not all those elements in the biblical 
history which we are now considering. There is certainly a 
resemblance to the myth of other nations in the close and 
familiar association of the one God with the ancestors of our 
race and the patriarchs of Israel, however we may explain it. 
Whatever names we may give to these beautiful and sacred 
traditions which were transmitted in the families of God's 
people from generation to generation, and finally used by the 
sacred historians in their holy books ; whatever names we may 
give them in distinction from the legends and myths of other 
nations, — none can fail to see that poetic embellishment, natural 
and exquisitely beautiful, artless and yet most artistic, which 
comes from the imagination of the common people of the most 
intelligent nations, in these sources that were used by divine 
inspiration in giving us ancient history in its most attractive 
form. Indeed, the imagination is in greater use in Hebrew 
history than in any other history, with all the Oriental wealth 
of colour in the prophetic historians. 

1 Lenormant, Beginnings of History^ N.Y., 1882, p. 187. 

2 George P. Marsh, article " Legend," in Johnson's JVeio Universal Cyclopcedia, 
1876, II. p. 1714, and the Legenda Aurea, or Historia Lombardica, of Jacobus 
de Voragine of the thirteenth century. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 333 



II. The Historical Use of the Myth 

Scholars differ very greatly in their views as to the mythi- 
cal element in Holy Scripture. There is a general tendency 
on the part of most critics to avoid the term. But, in fact, the 
term "myth" means nothing more than a primitive religious 
story as to the origin of the nation or race, or the association 
of its ancestors with the deity. There is nothing essen- 
tially polytheistic in the term. If, therefore, we distinguish 
between polytheistic mythology and monotheistic myths, there 
is no valid objection to the use of the term " myth " in connection 
with those stories of the origin of Israel, and the communion of 
the ancient heroes with the heavenly world, which are so primi- 
tive that they are beyond the reach of external history and 
criticism . 

Take, for example, the story of the intermarriage of the 
daughters of men with the angels, in Gen. 6^"^. If this story 
were found in any other sacred book but the Bible, no one 
would hesitate to regard it as a myth. Vain efforts have been 
made in recent times to explain away the angels in various 
ways, but no respectable commentator would countenance such 
a thing in our days. There can be no doubt whatever that the 
passage refers to angels. Why, then, should we hesitate to 
regard it as a myth ? A myth is not necessarily untrue to fact ; 
it is rather a popular, imaginative colouring of a conception of 
fact, or of a real fact. It is not necessary to deny that there 
was such a real union of angels with mankind, even if one 
hints that the form of the story is mythical. 

It may be of value to listen to the words of several eminent 
scholars on this question. Dr. Moore discusses the question with 
reference to the story of Samson. 

"The similarity, in several particulars, between the story of 
Samson and that of Herakles was early noticed. . . . Many modern 
writers have made the same comparison, and inferred that Sam- 
son is the Hebrew counterpart of the Phoenician Melqart, the 
Greek Herakles ; a.nd that the story of his deeds was either ori- 
ginally a cognate myth, or has taken up numerous mythical ele- 
ments. . . . The older writers contented themselves with drawing 



334 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

out the parallels to the Herakles myth ; each begins his career of 
ad\^enture by strangling a lion; each perishes at last through the 
machinations of a woman ; each chooses his own death. Samson's 
fox-catching is compared with the capture of the Erymanthian 
boar, the Cretan bull, the hind of Artemis ; the spring which is 
opened at Lehi to quench his thirst, with the warm baths which 
Sicilian nymphs open to refresh the weary Herakles ; the carrying 
off of the gates of Gaza reminds some of the setting up of the 
Pillars of Hercules, others of Herakles' descent to the nether- 
world. Meier and Ewald even discover that Samson has exactly 
twelve labours, like Herakles (in late systems). Steinthal not 
only identifies Samson with Melqart-Herakles, but attempts to 
explain the whole story as a solar myth, by a thorough-going ap- 
plication of the method which Max Mliller and his school intro- 
duced in Aryan mythology. He is followed in the main by 
Goldziher, Seinecke, and Jul. Braun. . . . Wietzke identifies 
Samson with the ^ Egyptian Herakles,' Horus-Ea. The Philistine 
women all represent ^ Sheol-Taf enet ' ; the Philistines, with whom 
he is in perpetual strife, are the children of Set-Typhon. The tale 
of Samson follows the Sun-god through the year : Spring (chap- 
ter 14), Summer (W^-^^-), Autumn, and Winter (15^^^^) ; chapter 16 
is his descent to the world below ; he breaks the gates of Hades 
(16^"^) ; bound by Delilah, he loses his eyes and his strength, but 
his might returns and he triumphs as a god over his foes (16^*^)- 
The name ptl^^tl? is derived from ti^^tl^ ' sun.' ... A legend whose 
hero bore such a name would attract and absorb elements of an 
originally mythical character, such as the foxes in the corn-fields, 
perhaps, represent; but if this be true, all consciousness of the 
origin and significance of the tale had been lost, and the mythical 
traits commingle freely with those which belong to folk-story. 
This explanation is at least as natural as the alternative, that an 
original solar myth has been transformed into heroic legend, with 
the admixture of a large non-mythical element. The historical 
character of the adventures of Samson may be given up without 
denying the possibility, or even probability, that the legend, which 
is very old, has its roots in the earth, not in the sky." ^ 

A more cautious view is presented by Dr. Eobertson. 

" Any traces of mythology to be found in the Old Testament 
are far less elaborate. They may be said to be mere traces, either 
remains of an extinct system or rudiments that were never devel- 
oped, — such as the references to the ' sons of God and the daugh- 
ters of men,' Rahab, Leviathan, Tannin, and such like. These, it 

1 Moore, The International Critical Commentary^ Judges^ 1895, pp. 364, 365. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 335 

should be observed, as they lie before us in the books, are handled 
with perfect candour and simplicity, as if to the writers they had 
become divested of all dangerous or misleading associations, or 
were even nothing more than figures of speech.'' ^ 



III. Historical Use of the Legend 

There is very much less opposition to the use of legend for 
the sources of biblical history. There are few real critics at 
the present day who would deny the legends which lie at the 
basis of the historical books of the Old Testament. These are 
simply highly coloured and richly ornamented stories of actual 
events which happened in the primitive times. They were 
handed down from father to son in many generations of popu- 
lar narrative, passing through many minds and over many 
tongues, receiving in this way colouring, increment, condensa- 
tion, changes of many kinds, which do not, however, destroy 
the essential truth or fact. 

Eyle gives an excellent statement with reference to the early 
chapters of Genesis. 

" The literature of Jloly Scripture differs not widely in its out- 
ward form from other literature. In its prehistoric traditions, the 
Israelite literature shares many of the characteristic features of the 
earliest legends which the literature of other nations has preserved. 

" What though the contents of these chapters are conveyed in 
the form of unhistorical tradition ! The infirmity of their origin 
and structure only enhances, by contrast, the majesty of their 
sacred mission. In a dispensation where every stage of Hebrew 
thought and literature ministers to the unfolding of the purpose 
of the Most High, not even that earliest stage was omitted, which 
to human judgment seems most full of weakness. Saint and seer 
shaped the recollections which they had inherited from a forgot- 
ten past, until legend, too, as well as chronicle and prophecy and 
psalm, became the channel for the communication of eternal truths. 

"The poetry of primitive tradition enfolds the message of the 
Divine Spirit. Criticism can analyze its literary structure ; science 
can lay bare the defectiveness of its knowledge. But neither in 
the recognition of the composite character of its writing, nor in 
the discernment of the childish standard of its science, is there 
any reproach conveyed. For, as always is the case, the instrument 

1 Robertson, The Early Beligion of Israel^ 1889, p. 505. 



336 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of Divine Bevelation partakes of limitations inalienable from tlie 
age in which it is granted. The more closely we are enabled to 
scan the human framework, the more reverently shall we acknow- 
ledge the presence of the Spirit that pervades it." ^ 

Dr. Driver gives ns his opinion as to one of the legends in the 
life of David. 

" The narrative 17^-18^, precisely as it stands, it appears 
impossible to harmonize with 16^"^^^. The two narratives are 
in fact two parallel and, taken strictly, incompatible accounts 
of David's introduction to the history. In 16^^^^ David is of 
mature age and a 'man of war/ on account of his skill with the 
harp, brought into Saul's service at the time of the king's mental 
distress, and quickly appointed his armour-bearer (vv. 18, 21). In 
17^-18^ he is a shepherd lad, inexperienced in warfare, who first 
attracts the king's attention by his act of heroism against Goliath ; 
and the inquiry 17^5-58 comes strangely from one who in 16^^^ had 
not merely been told who his father was, but had manifested a 
marked affection for David, and had been repeatedly waited on 
by him (vv. 21, 23). The inconsistency arises not, of course, out 
of the double character or office ascribed to David (which is 
perfectly compatible with historical probability), but out of the 
different representation of Ms first introduction to Said. In LXX. 
(cod. B) 1712-31, 41,50, 55_-(^g5 g^pg j^Q^ recognised. By the omission of 
these verses the elements which conflict with 16^^-^ are greatly 
reduced {e.g. David is no longer represented as unknoion to Saul) ; 
but they are not removed altogether (comp. 1733,38ff. ^ith 16^^'^^^). 
It is doubtful, therefore, whether the text of LXX. is here to be 
preferred to MT. ; both We. (in Bleek's Einleitung, 1878, p. 216), 
and Kuenen (Onderzoek, 1887, p. 392) agree that the translators 
— or, more probably, perhaps, the scribe of the Hebrew MS. 
used by them — omitted the verses in question from harmonistic 
motives, without, however, entirely securing the end desired. 
The entire section 17^-18^ was, however, no doubt derived by the 
compiler of the book from a different source from 16^^^^ (notice 
how David is introduced, 17^^^-, as though his name had not been 
mentioned before), and embodies a different tradition as to the 
manner in which -Saul first became acquainted with David." ^ 

There are many examples of the use of legends in their 
poetic form. Several of these are given elsewhere in this 
volume.^ It will be sufficient to cite one of them here. 

1 Ryle, The Early Narratives of Genesis, 1892, pp. 136, 137. 

2 Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Book of Samuel, 1890, pp. 116, 117. 

3 See pp. 390, 391, 393. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 337 

Joshua 10^-"" gives an account of a theophany at Beth-horon, 
which decides the battle in favour of Joshua and Israel. The 
poetic extract is from an ancient ode, describing the battle, which 
has been lost. It is a fragment of a strophe, taken from the book 
of Yashar, as stated in the context : 

" Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon ; 
And thou, Moon, in the valley of Ayalon. 
And the Sun stood still, 
And the Moon stayed, 
Until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies." 

But the previous context, Jos. 10^^, gives another entirely dif- 
ferent prose legend of the theophany : 

" And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, while 
they were in the going down of Beth-horon, that Yahweh cast 
down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they 
died : they were more which died with the hailstones than they 
whom the children of Israel slew with the sword." 

These two legends, the one poetic, the other prose, came from 
two different original documents, and were based upon two en- 
tirely different versions of the battle. 

The dialogues and discourses of the ancient worthies are 
simple, natural, and profound. They are not to be regarded 
as exact productions of the words originally spoken, whether 
preserved in the memory of the people and transmitted in 
stereotyped form, or electrotyped on the mind of the historian or 
in his writing by divine inspiration ; they are rather reproduc- 
tions of the situation in a graphic and rhetorical manner, dif- 
fering from the like usage in Livy and Thucydides, Herodotus 
and Xenophon, only in that the latter used their reflection and 
imagination merely ; the former used the same faculties guided 
by divine inspiration into the truth, and restrained from error 
in all matters in which they were called to give religious in- 
struction. 

In the historical writings of Holy Scripture, there is a wealth 
of beauty and religious instruction for those students who ap- 
proach it, not only as a work of divine revelation from which 
the maximum of dogma, or of examples and maxims of practi- 
cal ethics, are to be derived ; but with the higher appreciation 
and insight of those who are trained to the historian's art of 
representation, and who learn from the art of history, and the 



338 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

styles and methods of history, the true interpretation of histori- 
cal books, where the soul enters into the enjoyment of the con- 
crete, and is unwilling to break up the ideal of beauty, or de- 
stroy the living reality, for the sake of the analytic process, 
and the abstract resultant, however important these may be in 
other respects, and under other circumstances. 



IV. Prophetic Discourse 

The Bible is as rich in oratory, as in its history and poetry. 
Indeed, the three run insensibly into one another in Hebrew 
prophecy. Rare models of eloquence are found in the histori- 
cal books, such as the plea of Judah ; ^ the charge of Joshua ; ^ 
the indignant outburst of Jotham ; ^ the sentence pronounced 
upon Saul by Samuel ; * the challenge of Elijah.^ The three 
great discourses of Moses in Deuteronomy are elaborate ora- 
tions, combining a great variety of motives and rhetorical forms, 
especially in the last discourse, to impress upon Israel the doc- 
trines of God, and the blessings and curses, the life and death, 
involved therein. 

The prophetical books present us collections of inspired elo- 
quence, which for unction, fervour, impressiveness, grandeur, 
sublimity, and power, surpass all the eloquence of the world, as 
they grasp the historical past and the ideal future, and entwine 
them with the living present, for the comfort and warning, the 
guidance and the restraint, of God's people. Nowhere else do 
we find such depths of passion, such heights of ecstasy, such 
dreadful imprecations, such solemn warnings, such impressive 
exhortations, and such sublime promises. 

Each prophet has his own peculiarities and excellences. 
"Joel's discourse is like a rapid, sprightly stream, flowing into 
a delightful plain. Hosea's is like a v/aterfall plunging down 
over rocks and ridges ; Isaiah as a mass of water rolling 
heavily along." ^ Micah has no superior in simplicity and 
originality of thought, spirituality and sublimity of conception^ 

1 Gen. 4418-34. 2 Jos. 24. » Jd. 9. * 1 Sam. 15. ^ 1 k. 18. 

6 AViinsche, Weissagungen des Propheten Joel, Leipzig, 1872, p. 38. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 339 

clearness and precision of prophetic vision. " Isaiah is not the 
especially lyrical prophet, or the especially elegiacal prophet, or 
the especially oratorical or hortatory prophet, as we would 
describe a Joel, a Hosea, or a Micah, with whom there is a 
greater prevalence of some particular colours ; but just as the 
subject requires, he has readily at command every different 
kind of style, and every different change of delineation ; and it 
is precisely this, that, in point of language, establishes his 
greatness, as well as, in general, forms one of his most tower- 
ing points of excellence. His only fundamental peculiarity is 
the lofty, majestic calmness of his style, proceeding out of the 
perfect command which he feels that he has over his matter." ^ 
Jeremiah is the prophet of sorrow, and his style is heavy and 
monotonous, as the same story of woe must be repeated again 
and again in varied strains. Ezekiel was, as Hengstenberg 
represents, of a gigantic appearance, well adapted to struggle 
effectively with the spirit of the times of the Babylonian cap- 
tivity, — a spiritual Samson, who, with powerful hand, grasped 
the pillars of the temple of idolatry and dashed it to the earth ; 
standing alone, yet worth a hundred prophetic schools, and, 
during his entire appearance, a powerful proof that the Lord 
was still among His people, although His visible temple was 
ground to powder. ^ 

In the New Testament the discourses of Jesus and His para- 
bolic teaching present us oratory of the Aramaic type ; simple, 
quiet, transparent, yet reaching to unfathomable depths, and as 
the very blue of heaven, — every word a diamond, every sen- 
tence altogether spirit and life, illuminating with their pure, 
searching light, quickening with their warm, pulsating, throb- 
bing love.^ 

The discourse of Saint Peter at Pentecost will vie with that of 
Cicero against Catiline in its conviction of the rulers of Israel, 
and in its piercing the hearts of the people. The discourses of 
Saint Paul on Mars Hill, and before the Jews in Jerusalem, and 



1 Ewald, Die Fropheten, Gottingen, 1867, I. p. 279. 
•2 Hengstenberg, Christology, T. & T. Clark, Eclin., 1864, Vol. II. p. 3. 
3 See A. B. Bruce, Parabolic Teaching of Christy London, 1882, for a fine 
appreciation of the literary forms of the parables. 



340 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the magnates of Rome at Csesarea, are not surpassed by De- 
mosthenes on the Crown. We see the philosophers of Athens 
confounded, some mockmg, and others convinced unto salvation. 
We see the Jewish mob at first silenced, and then bursting forth 
into a frantic yell for his blood. We see the Roman governor 
trembling before his prisoner's reasonings of justice and judg- 
ment to come. We do not compare the orations of Peter and 
Paul with those of Cicero and Demosthenes for completeness, 
symmetry, and artistic finish ; this would be impossible, for the 
sermons of Peter and Paul are only preserved to us in outline ; 
but, taking them as outlines, we maintain that for skilful use 
of circumstance, for adaptation to the occasion, for rhetorical 
organization of the theme, for rapid display of argument, in 
their grand march to the climax, and above all in the effects 
that they produced, the orations of Saint Peter and Saint Paul 
are preeminent. 

Nowhere else save in the Bible have the oratorical types of 
three distinct languages and civilizations combined for unity 
and variety of effect. These biblical models ought to enrich 
and fortify the sermon of our day. If we should study them 
as literary forms, as much as we study Cicero and Demosthenes, 
or as models of sacred eloquence, the pulpit would rise to new 
grandeur and sublimer heights and to more tremendous power 
over the masses of mankind. 



V. The Epistle 

The Epistle may be regarded as the third form of prose litera- 
ture. This is the contribution of the Aramaic language to the 
Old Testament in the letters contained in the books of Ezra 
and Nehemiah. But it is in the New Testament that the epistle 
receives its magnificent development in the letters of Saint James, 
Saint Peter, Saint Paul, Saint Jude, and Saint John, — some 
familiar, some dogmatic, some ecclesiastical, some pastoral, some 
speculative and predictive, and in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
we have an elaborate essay. 

How charming the letters of Cicero to his several familiar 
friends I What a loss to the world to be deprived of them ! 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 341 

But who among us would exchange for them the epistles of the 
apostles ? And yet it is to be feared that we have studied them 
not too much as doctrinal treatises, perhaps, but too little as 
familiar letters to friends and to beloved churches, and still less 
as literary models for the letter and the essay. It might refresh 
and exalt our theological and ethical treatises, if their authors 
would study awhile Saint Paul's style and method. They 
might form a juster conception of his doctrines and principles. 
They certainly would understand better how to use his doc- 
trines, and how to apply his principles. 



VI. Prose Works of the Imagination 

There has been a great reluctance on the part of Christian 
people to recognize such forms of literature in Holy Scripture. 
But an increasing number of scholars find several such works 
of the imagination among the Old Testament writings. We 
shall approach the question by working back to it in the lines 
of the history of Hebrew literature. Works of the imagina- 
tion play a very important part in Hebrew literature outside 
the Old Testament. The Haggadistic literature of the Jews, 
used chiefly for the instruction of the people in the synagogues 
and in the schools, was largely composed of such writings. 
Jewish rabbins used parables, stories, and legends of every 
variety of form and content with the utmost freedom, in order 
to teach doctrine and morals, and even to illustrate and enforce 
the legal precepts of the Jewish religion. Our Saviour in His 
teaching used the same method. His numerous parables have 
never been equalled for their simplicity, beauty, and power. 
No human imagination has ever equalled the imagination of 
the Lord Jesus in story-telling. The Prodigal Son, Dives and 
Lazarus, the Good Samaritan, the Wise and Foolish Virgins, 
the Talents, are masterpieces of art. No historic incident, no 
individual experience, could ever have such power over the 
souls of men as these pictures of the imagination of our Lord. 

The apocryphal literature has many such stories, — stories 
which have been the favourite themes of Christian art in all 



342 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ages. Judith and Holofernes,^ Zerubbabel and the King of 
Persia,^ the Maccabee mother and her seven sons,^ Bel and the 
Dragon,* Tobit,^ and Susanna,^ are sufficient to remind us of 
them. These are all regarded as canonical in the Roman Catho- 
lic Church. Luther says of Tobit : " Is it history ? then is it 
holy history. Is it fiction ? then is it a truly beautiful, whole- 
some, and profitable fiction, the performance of a gifted poet." 

Who can doubt at the present time that these are all stories 
invented by the imagination of the authors, written in order to 
teach important religious lessons ? 

There are no a priori reasons therefore why we should not 
find such prose works of the imagination in the Old Testament. 
We should not stumble at such literature even if the idea be 
new^ to us or repugnant to us. If we have poetic works of the 
imagination in Job, the Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes, why 
not prose works of the imagination ? If Jesus used such imag- 
inary scenes and incidents as we see in his parables, why may 
not inspired men in the times of the Old Testament revelation 
have used them also ? 

A careful study of the literature of the Old Testament shows 
that we have four prose works of the imagination in the Old 
Testament, all written in the times of the restoration. These 
are Ruth, Jonah, Esther, and Daniel. 



VII. The Book of Ruth an Idyll 

The book of Ruth is written in prose with two little snatches 
of poetry. It has appended to it a genealogical table which 
did not belong to the original document. The story is a sim- 
ple and graceful domestic story. It is a charming idyll. The 
scene is laid in the times of the Judges, but there is nothing to 
remind us of that time except certain antique customs which 
the author thinks it necessary to explain to his readers. Debo- 
rah, Jael, and Jephthah's daughter were the appropriate heroines 
of that period. They are the striking figures of a mde and 

1 The book of Judith. ^ Greek addition to Daniel. 

2 1 Esdras 4. s Book of Tobit. 

3 4 Mace. 6 Greek addition to Daniel. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 343 

warlike age. But Ruth seems altogether out of place in such 
rough times. No historian would ever think of writing such a 
domestic story as Ruth, as an episode in the history of such a 
period. 1 

The scenery of the story is the time of Judges, so far as the 
author's antiquarian knowledge goes ; but it is an ideal picture 
of primitive simplicity and agricultural life in Bethlehem, sep- 
arated from all that was gross and rude and rough in the real 
life of those times. The author invents the scenery for his 
actors, and leaves out of it all that would mar its simplicity 
and detract from its main interest. The lesson of this idyll 
is given in the words of Ruth and the words of Boaz. Ruth 
says to Naomi : ^ 

" Thy people shall be my people, 
And thy God my God." 

Boaz says to Ruth : ^ 

" May Yahweh recompense thy doing, 
And may thy reward be ample from Yahweh (God of Israel), 
Under whose wings thou art come to take refuge." 

The Moabitess has left her native land and her father's 
house, as did Abraham of old ; and she has sought refuge 
under the wings of Yahweh, the God of Israel, and she has 
received her reward. 

This story of Ruth and Boaz is all the more striking that it 
comes into conflict with a law of Deuteronomy, and its enforce- 
ment by Nehemiah. Deuteronomy gives this law : " An Am- 
monite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of 
Yahweh ; even to the tenth generation shall none belonging 
to them enter into the assembly of Yahweh for ever."* 

This certainly excludes Ruth, a Moabitess of the first genera- 
tion. Nehemiah enforced this law against women. He tells 
us : 

" In those days also saw I that the Jews had married women of 
Ashdod, of Ammon, of Moab ; and their children spake half in the 

1 Some have sought a reason in the fact that she was an ancestress of David. 
But there is nothing in the character of the monarchs of the Davidic dynasty 
that would lead us to suppose that they would encourage a writer to trace their 
descent from a poor and homeless Moabitess, however excellent her character. 

2 116. 3 212. 4 Deut. 233. 



344 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but 
according to the language of each people. And I contended with 
them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked 
off their hair, and made them swear by God,- saying, Ye shall not 
give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters for 
your sons, or for yourselves." ^ 

Now how shall we reconcile the story of Ruth and Boaz with 
the law of Deuteronomy and the history of Nehemiah ? We 
are reminded of another law of Deuteronomy ,2 that the eunuch 
shall not enter into an assembly of Yahweh. And yet the 
prophet of the exile says : " For thus saith Yahweh of the 
eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that 
please me, and hold fast by my covenant : Unto them will I 
give in mine house, and within my walls a memorial and a 
name better than of sons and of daughters. I will give them 
an everlasting name that shall not be cut off." ^ 

The book of Ruth and the great prophet of the exile take 
essentially the same position. They see that the grace of God 
to eunuchs and Moabites overrides legal precepts, and their 
zealous enforcement by painstaking magistrates. This seems 
to give a hint as to the time and purpose of the book of Ruth. 
It was written probably soon after the return from exile under 
Joshua and Zerubbabel, in the spirit of the great prophet of 
the exile, to encourage Israelites to take advantage of the 
imperial decree, and return to the Holy Land ; and with the 
special purpose of encouraging those who had married foreign 
wives, and also the foreign widows of Israelites, to return with 
their children, and seek refuge under the wings of Yahweh, in 
rebuilt Jerusalem. 

Although the book of Ruth is a work of the imagination, it 
is not necessary to deny that Ruth and Boaz were historical 
characters. • The historic persons, Ruth and Boaz, and the 
events of their courtship and marriage, were embellished by 
the imagination in order to set forth the great lessons the 
author would teach. Just as Zerubbabel was used in the 
apocryphal literature to set forth the lesson that truth is 
mightier than wine, women, and kings, so Ruth is used to 
1 Neh. 1323-25. 2 Deut. 23i. 3 jg. 564. 5. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 345 

teach us that the grace of God pushes beyond the race of 
Abraham and redeems even the Moabitess, for whom no pro- 
vision was made in the law code of Deuteronomy or in the dis- 
cipline of Nehemiah. 

VIII. The Story of Jonah 

The book of Jonah is inserted in both the Hellenistic and 
Rabbinical Canons among the Minor Prophets, and yet the book 
does not contain discourses of prophecy as do the other Minor 
Prophets. If the book of Jonah were history, its place ought 
to have been among the historical books. It is among the 
prophetical writings with propriety only so far as the story 
Avhich is contained in it was pointed with prophetic lessons. 
For this prophetic purpose it is immaterial whether the story 
is real history or an ideal of the imagination, or whether it is 
history idealized and embellished by the imagination. 

1. It was not the aim of the writer to write history. The 
story is given only so far as it is important to set forth the 
prophetic lessons of the book. There are two scenes, — the one 
on the sea, the other at Nineveh. The story begins abruptly ; 
it closes abruptly after giving the lessons. The transitions in 
the story are the rapid flight of the imagination, and not the 
steady flow of historical narrative. 

2. The prophet Jonah is mentioned in the history of the 
book of Kings,^ and a prediction of minor importance is men- 
tioned as given by him. It seems very remarkable, on the one 
hand, that the book of Jonah should omit this ministry in the 
land of Israel ; on the other hand, that the author of the book 
of Kings should mention such comparatively unimportant min- 
istry, and yet pass over such important prophetic ministry as 
that given in the book of Jonah. 

3. The two miracles reported in Jonah are marvels rather 
than miracles. There is nothing at all resembling them in the 
miracle-working of the Old Testament or the New Testament. 
They are more like the wonders of the Arabian Nights than 
the miracles of Moses, of Elijah, of Elisha, or of Jesus or His 

1 2 K. 1425. 



346 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

apostles. It is true that there are great sharks in the Mediter- 
ranean Sea which are said to have swallowed men and horses 
and afterwards to have cast them up. But this being so, the 
chief difficulty remains. How can we explain the suspended 
digestion of the fish, and the self-consciousness of Jonah as 
indicated by his prayer ? And even if we could overcome this 
difficulty by an unflinching confidence in the power of God to 
work any and every kind of miracle, the most serious objection 
would still confront us. It is not so much the supernatural 
power in the miracle that troubles us as the character of the 
miracle. There is in it, whatever way we interpret it, an ele- 
ment of the extravagant and the grotesque. The divine sim- 
plicity, the holy sublimity, and the overpowering grace which 
characterize the miracles of biblical history are conspicuously 
absent. We feel that there is no sufficient reason for such a 
miracle, and we instinctively shrink from it, not because of 
a lack of faith in the divine power of working miracles, but 
because we have such a faith in His grace, and holiness, and 
majesty that we find it difficult to believe that God could work 
such a grotesque and extravagant miracle as that described in 
the story of the great fish. So the story of the wonderful 
growth and withering of the tree is more like the magic of 
the Oriental tales than any of the biblical miracles. It seems 
to be brought into the scene as an embellishment rather than 
for any real purpose of grace. A careful study of all the 
miracles of Holy Scripture excludes this magic tree from their 
X3ategories, and, to say the least, puts it in a category by itself. 
4. The repentance of Nineveh, from the king on his throne 
to the humblest citizen, the extent of it, the sincerity of it, the 
depth of it, is still more marvellous. Nineveh was at that 
time the capital of the greatest empire of the world. It was a 
proud and conquering nation, least likely of all to repent. 
The history of the times is quite well known, and this history 
seems to make such an event incredible. Some have endeav- 
oured to minimize the repentance as a mere official one, such 
as were ordered by monarchs during the Middle Ages. But 
these apologists of traditional theory forget that according to 
the story God recognizes the sincerity and the extraordinary 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 347 

character of the repentance. God granted His mercy, and 
recalled His decree of destruction on that account. This 
repentance is a marvellous event. Nothing like it meets us in 
the history of Israel or in the history of the Church. It is an 
ideal of the imagination. Our Saviour uses the story of the 
repentance of Nineveh to shame the unrepenting cities of His 
time. There was no historical repentance so well suited to 
His purpose. 

5. The prayer given in the book is not suited to it if the 
story be historical, but it is entirely appropriate if it be 
regarded as ideal and symbolic. 

This prayer is the prayer of thanksgiving of a man who, 
either in fact or in figure, has been drowned in the sea. He has 
gone down to the bottom, the seaweed is wrapt about his head; 
he has then, in his departed spirit, gone down to the roots of 
the mountains, has entered into Sheol, the abode of the dead, 
and has been shut up in its cavern by the bars of the earth. 
His deliverance has been a resurrection from the dead. Such 
figures of speech to represent great sufferings of an individual 
or of a nation are found in the Psalms and the Prophets.^ 

If the descent into the belly of the fish, the abode therein 
three days, and the casting up again are simply a poetic symbol, 
a devouring of Israel by the great sea-monster, Babylon,^ it 
is entirely appropriate for the author to use in the song the 
symbol of death, Sheol, and resurrection, as a parallel symbol 
to that of the narrative, the swallowing by the fish, abiding 
three days in the fish, and casting forth by the fish. 

6. The whole style of the piece is such as we find in the 
Jewish Saggada^ of which this may be one of the earliest 
specimens. 

1 Hosea (131-^) uses the same figure of speech for the exile and the restoration. 
" I will ransom them from thepower of Sheol ; I will redeem them from Death.'''' 
Isaiah and Ezekiel also represent the restoration as a resurrection from Sheol, 
the abode of the dead, and as the rising up of the dry bones from the battle-field 
of the slain. 

2 The author probably had in mind the words of Jeremiah: "Nebuchad- 
nezzar . . . hath swallowed me up like a dragon, he hath filled his maw with my 
delicates ; he hath cast me out" (51^*). And he may have been thinking of 
Hosea's words: "After two days will he revive us; on the third day he will 
raise us up, and we shall live before him " (62). 



348 STUDY or holy scripture 

It is objected that our Lord in His use of Jonah, gives His sanc- 
tion to the historicity of the story ; but this objection has little 
weight, for our Lord's method of instruction was in the use of 
stories of his own composition. We ought not to be surprised, 
therefore, that he should use such stories from the Old Testament 
likewise. It is urged that our Saviour makes such a realistic use 
of it, that it compels us to think that he regarded it as real ; but, 
in fact, he does not make a more realistic use of Jonah than he 
does of the story of Dives and Lazarus. Just such a realistic use 
of the story of Jannes and Jambres withstanding Moses is made 
in the Second Epistle to Timothy, and the author compares them 
with the foes of Christ in his time, 2 Tim. 31 And Jude (v. 9) 
makes just as realistic a use of the story of Michael, the arch- 
angel, contending with the devil, and disputing about the body of 
Moses, and compares this dispute with the railers of his time. 
These stories are from the Jewish Haggada, and not from the Old 
Testament. No scholar regards them as historic events. If epis- 
tles could use the stories of the Jewish Haggada in this way, why 
should not our Lord use stories from the Old Testament? Our 
Saviour uses the story of Jonah just as the author of the book 
used it, to point important religious instruction to the men of his 
time. Indeed, our Lord's use of it rather favours his interpreta- 
tion of it as symbolic. For it is just this symbolism that the fish 
represents, — Sheol, the swallowing up, — death ; and the casting 
forth, — resurrection, — that we have seen in the story of Jonah 
interpreted by the prayer, which makes the story appropriate to 
symbolize the death and resurrection of Jesus. 

For these reasons, the story of Jonah is commonly regarded 
by modern scholars as an ideal story, a work of the imagination. 
There are two great lessons taught in the book of Jonah, one 
in each scene of the story. The first lesson is similar to that 
taught by Amos and a later psalmist. ^ 

God has power to bring up from the depths of the sea, from 
the womb of Sheol, from the belly of the fish, those who turn 
unto Him, to His holy temple. Israel's calling as the prophet 
of the nations cannot be escaped. He may be overwhelmed in 
the depths of affliction ; he may descend into Sheol, the abode of 
the dead ; he may be swallowed by the great monsters who 
subdue the nations, — but God will raise him up, restore him to 
life and to his prophetic ministry. Jonah — Pharisaic Israel 

1 Amos 92- 3 • Ps. 1397-10. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 349 

— may renounce his high calling and perish ; but a second 
Jonah, a revived and converted preacher, Avill surely fulfil it. 

But the greatest lesson of the story is in the repentance of 
Nineveh, and the attitude of Jonah toward that great event. 
Jonah again represents historic Israel, preaching with sufficient 
readiness the doom of the nations, and watching for the Dies 
Irce when that doom would be fulfilled. Jonah goes out of the 
city and selects a good place from whence he can see the grand 
sight, — the overthrow of the capital of that nation which was 
the greatest foe of his people. But Jonah does not represent 
the ideal Israel. God has other views than Jonah. He does 
not look with complacency upon the death of 120,000 babes, 
who knew not enough to do right or wrong. He does not 
delight in the death of men, but rather in the repentance of 
men. A million or more human beings gathered in Nineveh, 
that great capital of the ancient world, cannot perish without 
giving sorrow to the heart of God. Jonah may delight in such 
a scene ; God cannot. The repentance of Nineveh is sufficient 
to change all. In an instant the decree of its destruction is 
annulled, and divine love triumphs over the sentence of judg- 
ment. This author caught such a wonderful glimpse of the 
love of God to the heathen world, that it makes the book of 
Jonah a marvel in the doctrine of the Old Testament. 



IX. The Story of Esther 

The book of Esther is one of the Writings of the Rabbinical 
Canon. In the Hellenistic Canon, it is placed after the 
apocryphal pieces of fiction, called Tobit, and Judith, as if 
recognized to be of the same type. The style of Esther is 
dramatic and rapid in its development of incident. Scene after 
scene springs into place, until the climax of difficulty is reached, 
and the knot is tied so that it seems impossible to escape. 
Then it is untied with wondrous dexterity. All this is the art 
of the story-teller, and not the method of the historian. The 
things which interest the historian are not in the book. Esther 
is a didactic story, like Ruth and Jonah, Judith and Tobit, 
and raises more historical difficulties than can easily be re- 



350 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

moved. The monarch seems to be Xerxes, the voluptuous and 
absolute ruler of the Persian Empire. The story is one of court 
intrigue, in which Esther, the favourite wife, and her uncle, 
Mordecai, prevail over Haman, the prime minister. The book 
is connected with the Purim festival, and is supposed to give 
the historical account of its origin. This is denied by many 
modern scholars. It is held that Esther is a piece of historical 
fiction, designed to set forth the importance of the Purim fes- 
tival, as a national feast, and to teach the great lesson of patri- 
otism. It does not by any means follow from the connection 
of the book with the feast, that the book is historical. Indeed 
Esther does not explain the Purim feast. ^ It does not give any 
adequate reason why the Jews of Palestine and Egypt and of 
the rest of the world should celebrate a feast which, according 
to Esther, was connected with the deliverance of the Jews re- 
maining in exile in the Persian Empire, an event less worthy 
of commemoration than a hundred others. But it is not neces- 
sary to determine its exact origin. Many a Christian feast 
rests upon unhistoric legends. We need but mention the feast 
of the Ascension of Mary, the feast of Saint Veronica, the 
feast of the Finding of the Cross, and the feast of the Sleepers. 
The sole redeeming feature of the book is its patriotism. 
Esther and Mordecai are heroes of patriotic attachment to the 
interests of the Jews. For this they risk their honour and 
their lives. The same spirit we find in Judith, and, in a meas- 
ure, in Nehemiah and Daniel. If patriotism is a virtue, and 
belongs to good morals in the Jewish and Christian systems, 
then the book has its place in the Bible, as teaching this virtue, 
even if everything else be absent. No book is so patriotic as 
the book of Esther. Esther is the heroine of patriotic devo- 
tion. She is the incarnation of Jewish nationality, and thus is 
the appropriate theme of the great national festival of the Jews. 
And in all the Christian centuries Esther has been an inspira- 
tion to heroic women and an incentive to deeds of daring for 
heroic men. And if, as many signs seem to indicate, woman 
in the next century is to use her great endowments in a large 

1 See C. H. Toy, "Esther as Babylonian Goddess'' in The Neio World, 
March, 1898, pp. 130 seq. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 351 

measure for the advancement of the kingdom of God, Esther 
will exert a vaster influence in inspiring her to holy courage 
and unflinching devotion and service. For, granting that 
patriotism in its narrower sense may be a form of selfishness, 
yet when patriotism has been transformed into an enthusiasm 
for humanity and a passionate devotion to the Saviour of man, 
it then calls forth those wondrous energies of self-sacrifice with 
which woman seems to be more richly endowed than man. 

X. The Stories of Daniel 

The book of Daniel also belongs to the group of prose litera- 
ture which may be called historical fiction. In the Hebrew 
Canon Daniel is not classed with the Prophets, but with the 
Writings. The Baraitha ascribes it to the men of the Great 
Synagogue ; ^ later tradition to Daniel himself. But both these 
theories are against the evidence. The language is of a later 
type. As Driver says : " The verdict of the language of 
Daniel is thus clear. The Persian words presuppose a period 
after the Persian Empire had been well established ; the Greek 
words demand^ the Hebrew support^ and the Aramaic permit a 
date after the conquest of Palestine hy Alexander the Great 
(B.C. 332)." 2 

The Hebrew book of Daniel encloses an Aramaic section, 
2^^-1. This section is in the western Aramaic dialect, and 
could not have been written in Babylon, where the eastern 
Aramaic was used. It seems probable that this Aramaic sec- 
tion is older than the enclosing Hebrew parts. ^ The book is 
divided into two equal parts. Chapters 1-6, a series of stories, 
and Chapters 7-12, a series of visions, both in chronological 
order. This division does not correspond with the difference 
in language, and comes from the final author. The stories are 
all in the older Aramaic section, in which Daniel is always 
spoken of in the third person. They are not historical or bio- 
graphical, but are episodes with prophetic lessons. They are 
grouped about the legendary Daniel of Ezek. 14^4^20^ 28^, and 

1 See p. 252. 2 introduction, 6th ed., p. 508. 

^ Strack, Einleitung, 5te Aufl., p. 150. 



352 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

are of the same type of historical fiction as the later stories 
of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, which were added to 
Daniel in the ancient Greek Septuagint version. 
This is the opinion of Sayce : ^ 

"'Darius the Mede' is, in fact, a reflection into the past of 
Darius, the son of Hystaspes, just as the siege and capture of 
Babylon by Cyrus is a reflection into the past of its siege and 
capture by the same prince. The name of Darius and the story 
of the slaughter of the Chaldaean king go together. They are 
alike derived from that unwritten history, which in the East of 
to-day is still made by the people, and which blends together in a 
single picture the manifold events and personages of the past. It 
is a history which has no perspective, though it is based on actual 
facts ; the accurate calculations of the chronologer have no mean- 
ing for it, and the events of a century are crowded into a few 
years. This is the kind of history which the Jewish mind in the 
time of the Talmud loved to adapt to moral and religious pur- 
poses. This kind of history thus becomes, as it were, a parable, 
and under the name of Haggadah serves to illustrate the teaching 
of the Law." 

The Aramaic vision of Chapter 7 is entirely parallel with the 
vision of Chapter 2. If the story of Chapter 2 is fiction, the 
prediction must be fiction likewise. These two visions are, 
therefore, pseudepigraphic. The visions of Chapters 8-12 in 
the Hebrew language are of a still later date than Chapters 2- 
7, and are pseudepigraphic likewise. The book of Daniel is 
unknown to Ben Sirach, who mentions Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 
and the Twelve ; ^ and all Hebrew literature is silent with ref- 
erence to it until the earliest Sibylline oracle, III. 388 ff., circa 
140 B.C., and 1 Mace. 2^^, circa 100 B.C., both referring to the 
Aramaic section. Daniel is frequently used in the subsequent 
pseudepigrapha and the New Testament. The writer is evi- 
dently familiar with the Greek period of history, but un- 
f amiliarity with Babylonian and Persian periods leads him into 
grave historical blunders. The Hebrew sections seem to imply 
the troublous times of Antiochus Epiphanes. The angelology, 
eschatology, and Messianic ideas of the book are nearer to those 

1 Sayce, The Higher Criticism and the Monuments, 1894, pp. 528, 529. 

2 See pp. 123 seq. 



BIBLICAL PROSE LITERATURE 353 

of the book of Enoch and the New Testament than they are to 
those of other writings of the Old Testament. The religious 
ideas are nearer those of the late Greek period. The evidence 
from all these sources leads us to the opinion that the book of 
Daniel was written as historic fiction in 168-165 B.C., with the 
use of various earlier documents, as an encouragement to heroic 
courage and fidelity to the national religion. 
The words of Bevan may be cited here : 

"The narratives are evidently intended to be consecutive in 
point of time, but they are very loosely connected with each 
other. Their most marked feature is the didactic purpose which 
appears throughout. In every one of these stories we see the 
righteous rewarded, or the wicked signally punished, as the case 
may be. On the one hand Daniel and his three friends, the ser- 
vants of the True G-od, though apparently helpless in the midst 
of the heathen, triumph over all opposition, while on the other 
hand the mightiest Gentile potentates are confounded and humbled 
to the dust. This would in itself suffice to indicate that the book 
was intended for the encouragement of the Jews at a time when 
they were being persecuted by pagan rulers. And when we pass 
from the narratives to the visions, we find that this view is con- 
firmed. Tor in the visions the final victory of the ' Saints ' over 
the G-entile powers is repeatedly insisted upon. Further exami- 
nation shews that this victory of the saints is to take place in 
the days of a Gentile king who will surpass all his predecessors 
in wickedness. . . . 

"It is, however, necessary to guard against a possible mis- 
conception. Though the author of Daniel has everywhere the 
circumstances of his own time in view, we cannot regard ISTebu- 
chadnezzar and Belshazzar, still less Darius the Mede, simply as 
portraits of Antiochus Epiphanes. The author is contending, not 
against Antiochus personally, but against the heathenism of which 
Antiochus was the champion. He justly considers the struggle 
between Antiochus and the faithful Jews as a struggle between 
opposing principles, and his object is to shew that under all 
circumstances the power of God must prevail over the powers of 
this world. 

"That the author does not address his contemporaries in his 
own name, after the manner of the ancient prophets, but clothes 
his teaching in the form of narratives and visions, is perfectly in 
accordance with the spirit of later Judaism. The belief that no 
more prophets were to be found among the people of God seems 
2a 



354 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

gradually to have established itself during those ages of Gentile 
oppression (Ps. 74^). Loathing the present, the pious Jews natu- 
rally idealized the past." ^ 

These are then the most general forms of prose literature 
contained in the Sacred Scriptures. They vie with the literary 
models of the best nations of ancient and modern times. They 
ought to receive the study of all Christian men and women. 
They present the greatest variety of form, the noblest themes, 
and the very best models. Nowhere else can we find more 
admirable aesthetic as well as moral and religious culture. 
Christian people should urge that our schools and colleges 
attend to this literature, and not neglect it for the sake of the 
Greek and Roman literatures, which vfith all their rare forms 
and extraordinary grace and beauty, yet lack the Oriental 
wealth of colour, depths of passion, heights of rapture, holy 
aspirations, transcendent hopes, and transforming moral power. 

1 Bevan, The Book of Daniel, 1892, pp. 22, 23, 24. 



CHAPTER XIV 

CHARACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 

The Hebrews were from the most ancient times a remark- 
ably literary and poetic people. Poetry pervaded and in- 
fluenced their entire life and history. The Bible has preserved 
to us a large amount of this poetry, but it is almost exclusively 
religious poetry. The most ancient poetry of Assyria, Baby- 
lonia, and Egypt is likewise religious. There is, however, evi- 
dence from the poetic lines and strophes quoted in the 
historical books, as well as from statements with regard to 
other poetry not included in the collections known to us, 
sufficient to show that a large proportion of the poetic litera- 
ture of the Hebrews has been lost. This poetry had to do 
with the every-day life of the people, and with those national, 
social, and historical phases of experience that were not strictly 
religious. For reference is made to the Booh of the Wars of 
Yahweh ^ and the Book of Yashar,^ anthologies of poetry earlier 
than any of the poetic collections in the Hebrew Scriptures ; 
and also to a great number of songs and poems of Solomon 
with reference to flowers, plants, trees, and animals.^ The 
mention of Ethan, Hem_an, Calcol, and Darda, the sons of 
Mahol, in connection with the wisdom and poems of Solomon, 
opens a wide field of conjecture with regard to the great 
amount of their poetr}^* And if such a masterpiece as the 
book of Job is the product of a sacred poet whose name, or at 
least connection with the poem, has been lost, how many more 
such great poems and lesser ones may have disappeared from 
the memory of the Hebrew people during their exile and pro- 
longed afflictions under foreign yokes. For we cannot believe 

1 Nu. 211*. 2 Jo. 1013 . 2 Sam. lis. 3 i k. 432- 33. 4 i k. 431. 

355 



356 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

that the few odes ^ preserved from the early times could exist 
alone. These masterpieces of lyric poetry must have been the 
flower and fruit of a long and varied poetical development. 
Indeed there are fragments of other odes ^ which are doubtless 
but specimens of many that have disappeared. 

Reuss admirably states the breadth of Hebrew poetry : 

^^ All that moved the souls of the multitude was expressed in 
song ; it was indispensable to the sports of peace, it was a necessity 
for the rest from the battle, it cheered the feast and the marriage 
(Is. 5^^ ; Amos 6^ ; Jd. 14), it lamented in the hopeless dirge for 
the dead (2 Sam. 3^), it united the masses, it blessed the individ- 
ual, and was everywhere the lever of culture. Young men and 
maidens vied with one another in learning beautiful songs, and 
cheered with them the festival gatherings of the villages, and the 
still higher assemblies at the sanctuary of the tribes. The maid- 
ens at Shilo went yearly with songs and dances into the vineyards 
(Jd. 21^^), and those of Gilead repeated the sad story of Jephthah's 
daughter (Jd. 11^) ; the boys learned David's lament over Jona- 
than (2 Sam, 1^^) ; shepherds and hunters at their evening rests 
by the springs of the wilderness sang songs to the accompani- 
ment of the flute (Jd. 5^^). The discovery of a fountain was the 
occasion of joy and song (ISTu. 21^'). The smith boasted defiantly 
of the products of his labour (Gen. 4^). Eiddles and witty say- 
ings enlivened the social meal ( Jd. 14^^ ; 1 K. 10). Even into the 
lowest spheres the spirit of poetry wandered and ministered to the 
most ignoble pursuits (Is. 23 ^^ ^^«).^ 

I. The Features of Hebrew Poetry 

In the Hebrew poetry preserved to us in the Sacred Script- 
ures we observe the following characteristics : 

1. It is religious poetry. Indeed it was most suitable that 
Hebrew poetry should have this as its fundamental characteris- 
tic ; for the Hebrews had been selected by God from all 
the nations to be His own choice possession, His first-born 
among the nations of the earth ; ^ and therefore it was their dis- 
tinctive inheritance that they should be a religious people above 

1 Ex. 15 ; Nu. 21 ; Jd. 5. See pp. 369, 379, 413. 

2 Jos. 10 12. 13 ; 1 Chr. 1218. See pp. 337, 393. 

3 Art. "Heb. Poesie," Herzog, Encyklopddie, II. Aufl. V. pp. 672 seq. 
* Ex. 422, 195. 



CHAEACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 357 

all things else. And it is of the very nature of religion that 
it should express itself in song ; for religion lays hold of the 
deepest emotions of the human soul, and causes the heartstrings 
to vibrate with the most varied and powerful feelings of which 
man is capable. These find expression through the voice and pen 
in those forms of human language which alone by their rhyth- 
mic movement are capable of uttering them. From this point 
of view Hebrew poetry has unfolded a rich and manifold lit- 
erature that not only equals in this regard the noblest prod- 
ucts of the most cultivated Indo-Germanic races, the Greek, 
the Roman, and the Hindu ; but also lies at the root of the 
religious poetry of the Jewish Synagogue and the Church 
of Christ, as their fruitful source, their perennial well-spring of 
life and growth. No poetry has such power over the souls of 
men as Hebrew poetry. David's Psalms, Solomon's sentences, 
Isaiah's predictions, the plaints of Job, are as fresh and potent 
in their influence as when first uttered by their masterly 
authors. They are world-wide in their sway ; they are ever- 
lasting in their sweep. The songs of Moses and the Lamb are 
sung by heavenly choirs.^ 

2. It is simple and natural. Ewald states that " Hebrew 
poetr}^ has a simplicity and transparency that can scarcely be 
found anywhere else — a natural sublimity that knows but little 
of fixed forms of art, and even when art comes into play, it ever 
remains unconscious and careless of it. Compared with the 
poetry of other ancient peoples, it appears as of a more simple 
and childlike age of mankind, overflowing with an internal 
fulness and grace that troubles itself but little with external 
ornament and nice artistic law." ^ Hence it is that the distinc- 
tion between poetry and rhetorical prose is so slight in Hebrew 
literature. The Hebrew orator, especially if a prophet, inspired 
with the potent influences of the prophetic spirit, and stirred 
to the depths of his soul with the divine impulse, speaks 
naturally in an elevated poetic style, and accordingly the greater 
part of prophecy is poetic. And when the priest or king stands 
before the people to bless them, or lead them in their de- 
votions, their benedictions and prayers assume the poetic 
1 Rev. 153. 2 DiQ Dichter, I. p. 15. 



358 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

movement. Thus there is the closest correspondence between 
the emotion and its expression, as the emotion gives natural 
movement and harmonious undulation to the expression hj its 
own pulsations and vibrations. The pulsations are expressed 
by the beat of the accent, which, falling as a rule on the ulti- 
mate in Hebrew words, strikes with peculiar power ; and the 
vibrations are expressed in accordance with the great variety 
of movement of which they are capable in the parallelism of 
members. As W. Robertson Smith correctly says : " Among the 
Hebrews all thought stands in immediate contact with living 
impressions and feelings, and so if incapable of rising to the ab- 
stract is prevented from sinking to the unreal." ^ This faithful 
mirroring of the concrete in the poetic expression is the secret 
of its power over the masses of mankind, who are sensible of its 
immediate influence upon them, although they may be incapable 
of giving a logical analysis of it. 

3. It is essentially subjective. The poet sings or writes from 
the vibrating chords of his own soul's emotions, presenting 
the varied phases of his own experience, in sorrow and joy, in 
faith and hope, in love and adoration, in conflict, agony, and 
despair, in ecstasy and transport, in vindication of himself 
and imprecation upon his enemies. Even when the external 
world is attentively regarded, it is not for itself alone, but on 
account of its relation to the poet's own soul as he is brought 
into contact and sympathy with it. This characteristic of 
Hebrew poetry is so marked in the Psalter, Proverbs, and book 
of Job, as to give their entire theology an anthropological and 
indeed an ethical character. Man's inmost soul, and all the 
vast variety of human experience, are presented in Hebrew 
poetry in the common experience of humanity of all ages and 
of all lands. 

4. It is sententious. The Hebrew poet expresses his ethical 
and religious emotions in brief, terse, pregnant sentences loosely 
related one with another, and often without any essential con- 
nection, except through the common unity of the central theme. 
They are uttered as intuitions, that which is immediately seen 
and felt, rather than as products of logical reflection, or careful 

1 British Quarterly, January, 1877, p. 36. 



CHARACTERISTICS OE BIBLICAL POETRY 359 

elaborations of a constructive imagination. The parts of the 
poem, greater and lesser, are distinct parts, the distinction often 
being so sharp and abrupt that it is difficult to distinguish and 
separate the various sections of the poem, owing to the very 
fact of the great variety of possibility of division, in which it 
is a question simply of more or less. The author's soul vibrates 
with the beatings of the central theme, so that the movement 
of the poem is sometimes from the same base to a more ad- 
vanced thought, then from a corresponding base or from a 
contrasted one ; and at times, indeed, step by step, in marching 
or climbing measures. As Aglen says, " Hebrew eloquence is 
a lively succession of vigorous and incisive sentences, produc- 
ing in literature the same effect which the style called arabesque 
produces in architecture. Hebrew wisdom finds its complete 
utterance in the short, pithy proverb. Hebrew poetry wants 
no further art than a rhythmical adaptation of the same sen- 
tentious style." 1 Hence the complexity and confusion of He- 
brew poetry to minds which would find strict logical relations 
between the various members of the poem, and constrain them 
after occidental methods. Hence the extravagance of Hebrew 
figures of speech, which transgress all classic rules of style, 
heaping up and mixing metaphors, presenting the theme in 
such a variety of images, and with such exceeding richness of 
colouring, that the Western critic is perplexed, confused, and be- 
Avildered in striving to harmonize them into a consistent whole. 
Hebrew poetry appeals through numberless concrete images to 
the emotional and religious nature, and can only be appre- 
hended by entering into sympathetic relations with it by 
following the guidance of its members to their central theme, 
to which they are all in subjection as to a prince, while in com- 
parative independence of one another. 

5. It is realistic. Shairp says : " Whenever the soul comes 
into living contact with fact and truth, whenever it realizes 
these with more than common vividness, there arises a thrill 
of joy, a glow of emotion. And the expression of that thrill, 
that glow, is poetry. The nobler the objects, the nobler will 
be the poetry they awaken when they fall on the heart of a true 
1 Bible Educator, Vol. II. p. 340. 



360 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

poet."^ The Hebrew poets entered into deep and intimate 
fellowship with external nature, the world of animal, vegetable, 
and material forces ; and by regarding them as in immediate 
connection with God and man, dealt only with the noblest 
themes. To the Hebrew poet all nature was animate with the 
influence of the Divine Spirit, who was the agent in the crea- 
tion, brooding over the chaos, and conducts the whole universe 
in its development toward the exaltation of the creature to 
closer communion with God, so that it may attain its glory in 
the divine glory. Hence all nature is aglow with the glory 
of God, declaring Him in His being and attributes, praising 
Him for His wisdom and goodness. His minister to do His 
pleasure, rejoicing at His advent and taking part in His 
theophanies. And so it is the representation of Hebrew poetry 
that all nature shares in the destiny of man. In its origin it 
led by insensible gradations to man, its crown and head, the 
masterpiece of the divine workman. In his fall it shared with 
him in the curse ; and to his redemption it ever looks forward, 
with longing hope and throes of expectation, as the redemption 
of the entire creation. And so there is no poetry so sympa- 
thetic with nature, so realistic, so sensuous and glowing in its 
representations of nature, as Hebrew poetry. This feature of 
the sacred writings, which has exposed them to the attacks of 
the physical sciences, presenting a wide and varied field of criti- 
cism, is really one of their most striking features of excellence, 
commending them to the simple-minded lovers of nature ; for 
while the Hebrew Scriptures do not teach truths and facts of 
science in scientific forms, yet they alone, of ancient poetry, laid 
hold of the eternal principles, the most essential facts and forms 
of objects of nature, with a sense of truth and beauty that none 
but sacred poets, enlightened by the Spirit of God, have been 
enabled to do. Hence it is that not even the sensuous romantic 
poetry of modern times, enriched with the vast stores of re- 
search of modern science, can equal the poetry of the Bible in 
its faithfulness to nature, its vividness and graphic power, its 
true and intense admiration of the beauties of nature and rever- 
ence of its sublimities. 

1 Poetic Interpretation of Nature, p. 15. 



CHAKACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 361 



II. Ancient Theokies of Hebrew Poetry 

The leading characteristics of Hebrew poetry determine its 
forms of expression ; its internal spirit sways and controls the 
form with absolute, yea, even with capricious, power. The 
Hebrew poets seem acquainted with those various forms of 
artistic expression used by the poets of other nations to adorn 
their poetry, yet they do not employ them as rules or prin- 
ciples of their art, constraining their thought and emotion 
into conformity with them, but rather use them freely for 
particular purposes and momentary effects. Indeed Hebrew 
poetry attained its richest development at a period when these 
various external beauties of form had not been elaborated into 
a system, as was the case at a subsequent time in other nations 
of the same family of languages. 

There are various ways employed in the poetry of the sister 
languages of measuring and adorning the verses. Thus rliyme 
is of exceeding importance in Arabic poetry, having its fixed 
rules ^ carefully elaborated. But no such rules can be found in 
Hebrew poetry. Rhyme exists, and is used at times with great 
effect to give force to the variations in the play of the emotion 
by bringing the variations to harmonious conclusions ; but this 
seldom extends beyond a group of verses or a strophe. ^ So also 
the Hebrew poet delights in the play of words, using their 
varied and contrasted meanings, changing the sense by the 
slight change of a letter, or contrasting the sense all the more 
forcibly in the use of words of similar form and vocalization, 
and sometimes of two or three such in the parallel verses. ^ Al- 
literation and assonance are also freely employed. All this is in 
order that the form may correspond as closely as possible to the 
thought and emotion in their variations, as synonymous, anti- 
thetical, and progressive ; and that the colouring of the expres- 
sion may heighten its effect. The principle of rhyme, however, 
remains entirely free. It is not developed into a system and 
artistic rules. 

The measurement of the verses, or the principle of metres^ is 

1 Wright, Arabic Grammar^ 2d ed., II. pp. 377-381. 

2 See pp. 373 seq. 3 See pp. 375, 376. 



362 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

thoroughly developed in Arabic poetry, where they are ordi- 
narily reckoned as sixteen in number. ^ Repeated efforts have 
been made to find a system of metres in Hebrew poetry. Thus 
Josephus^ represents that the songs Ex. 15 and Deut. 32 were 
written in hexameters, and that the Psalms were written in 
several metres, such as trimeters and pentameters. Eusebius ^ 
says that Deut. 32 and Ps. 18 are in heroic metre of sixteen 
syllables, and that trimeters and other metres were employed by 
the Hebrews. Jerome * compares Hebrew poetry with the Greek 
poetry of Pindar, Alcseus, and Sappho, and represents the book 
of Job as composed mainly of hexameters with the movement 
of dactyls and spondees ; and ^ he finds in the Psalter iambic 
trimeters and tetrameters. But these writers seem to have 
been misled by their desire to assimilate Hebrew poetry to the 
great productions of the classic nations with which they were 
familiar. 

And yet there is a solid basis of fact underlying these state- 
ments. It is true that the Massoretic system of vowel points 
does not admit of any such arrangement of measured feet as 
is known in Greek and Latin poetry. The fragments of the 
transliterated Hebrew of Origen's Hexapla show us that the 
Massoretic system is extremely artificial ; the pointing of 
Origen's time does not yield the measured feet, or the equal 
number of syllables in lines, according to the statement of 
Eusebius, who must have either built upon the Hebrew pro- 
nunciation as given by Origen, or else upon information from 
Hebrew sources or upon tradition. Jerome must have known 
the Hebrew pronunciation of his day and the measures of 
poetry as known to the Hebrew of his day. But it seems al- 
together likely that the accurate pronunciation of the ancient 
Hebrew had already been lost, and that the knowledge of the 
measures of biblical poetry had perished likewise. 

There is no evidence in Jerome's version that he under- 
stood the measures of biblical poetry. There is certainly no 
heroic metre of sixteen syllables in Ps. 18 or Deut. 32. The 

1 WrigM, Arabic Grammar^ 2d ed., II. p. 387. ^ De Prcep. Evang., XL 5. 

2 Antiquities, 11. 16, IV. 8, VII. 12. ^ Preface to the Book of Job. 

5 Epist. ad Paulam. 



CHARACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 363 

number of syllables varies, if we count the two separated lines 
of tbe Hebrew arrangement as one, usually from twelve to 
sixteen syllables, seldom more and seldom less. There are 
certainly no dactyls in the book of Job. It is quite possible 
to arrange the book of Job like Ps. 18 and Deut. 32 ; for the 
book of Job has the same measure as these ancient poems, and 
so presents the appearance of hexameters to those who think 
these other poems hexameters. The truth that underlies the 
statement of these ancient authors, which they received from 
Hebrew tradition, is that there are trimeters, tetrameters, 
pentameters, and hexameters in Hebrew poetry. The measure- 
ment, however, is not of feet or of syllables, but of words or 
word accents, just as in ancient Egyptian and Babylonian 
poetry. 1 If the hexameter is regarded as six measures, He- 
brew poetry has six measures, that is, six words or word groups, 
just as truly as Greek and Latin poetry has six measures con- 
sisting of so many feet of varied arrangement as to quantity. 



III. Modern Theories of Hebrew Poetry 

More recent attempts have been made to explain and meas- 
ure Hebrew verses after the methods of the Arabic and Syriac. 
Thus William Jones ^ endeavoured to apply the rules of Arabic 
metre to Hebrew poetry. But this involves the revolutionary 
proceeding of doing away with the Massoretic system entirely, 
and in its results is far from satisfactory. The Arabic poetry 
may be profitably compared with the Hebrew as to spirit, char- 
acteristics, figures of speech, and emotional language, as Wen- 
rich has so well done,^ but not as regards metres ; for these, as 
the best Arabic scholars state, are comparatively late and were 
probably preceded by an earlier and freer poetic style. 

Saalchiitz* endeavoured to construct a system of Hebrew 
metres, retaining the Massoretic vocalization, but contending 
that the accents do not determine the accented syllable, and 

1 See p. 378. 2 Com. Poet. Asiat. curav., Eichhorn, 1777, pp. 61 seq. 

^ De Poeseos Heh. atque Arabic, orig. indole mutuoque consensu atque dis- 
cnmine^ Lipsise, 1843. 

* Von der Form der Hehrdischen Poesie, 1825. 



364 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

SO pronouncing the words in accordance with the Aramaic, and 
the custom of Polish and German Jews, with the accent on the 
penult instead of the ultimate. 

Bickell 1 strives to explain Hebrew poetry after the analogy 
of Syriac poetry. His theory is that Hebrew poetry is essen- 
tially the same as Syriac, not measuring syllables, but counting 
them in regular order. There is a constant alternation of ac- 
cented and unaccented syllables, a continued rise and fall, so 
that only iambic and trochaic feet are possible. The Masso- 
retic accentuation and vocalization are rejected, and the Ara- 
maic put in its place. The grammatical and rhythmical accents 
coincide. The accent is, like the Syriac, generally on the 
penult. The parallelism of verses and thought is strictly 
carried out. Bickell has worked out his theory with a degree 
of moderation and thoroughness which must command admira- 
tion and respect. Not distinguishing between long and short 
syllables, and discarding the terminology of classic metres, he 
gives us specimens of metres of 5, 7, 12, 6, 8, 10 syllables, and 
a few of varying syllables. He has applied his theory to the 
whole of Hebrew poetry ,2 and arranged the entire Psalter, 
Proverbs, Job, Lamentations, Song of Songs, most of the 
poems of the historical books, and much of the prophetic poetry 
in accordance with these principles. He has also reproduced 
the effect in a translation into German, with the same number 
of syllables and strophical arrangement.^ The theory is attrac- 
tive and deserves better consideration than it has thus far 
received from scholars ; yet it must be rejected on the ground 
(1) that it does away with the difference between the Hebrew 
and the Aramaic families of the Shemitic languages, and 
would virtually reduce the Hebrew to a mere dialect of the 
Aramaic. (2) It overthrows the traditional accentuation upon 
which Hebrew vocalization and the explanation of Hebrew 
grammatical forms largely depend. 

Doubtless the Massoretic system is artificial and designed 



1 Metrices Biblicce, 1879 ; Carmina Veteris Testamenti Metrice, 1882. 

2 Zeitschnft d. D. M. G., 1880, p. 557 ; Carmina Veteris Testamenti Metrice, 
1882. 

^ Dichtungen der Hebraer, 1882. 



CHARACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 365 

more for rhetorical rendering than for speech ; yet it must 
have a real basis in ancient usage. I cannot think that the 
accent on the ultimate was the invention of the Massorites or 
the Sopherim. There seems rather to be just this original 
difference between the great groups of the Shemitic family, that 
the Hebrew accents on the ultimate, the Aramaic on the penult, 
and the Arabic on the antepenult. The change of the accent 
to the penult among the more ignorant Jews was more natural 
than an artificial change from the penult to the ultimate. 

(3) Furthermore, Bickell is forced to make many arbitrary 
changes in the text to carry out his theory. He makes many 
wise suggestions, however, and it is somewhat remarkable how 
constantly his arrangements of the poetry in lines and strophes 
correspond with those which I have made on the simpler prin- 
ciple of measurement by word instead of measurement by 
syllable. 

Hebrew poetry, as Ewald has shown, may, on the Massoretic 
system of accentuation and vocalization, be regarded as gener- 
ally composed of lines of seven or eight syllables, with some- 
times a few more or a few less, for reasons that may be assigned. ^ 
This is especially true of the ancient hymns, which are chiefly 
trimeters, and of the major part of the Psalms, which are either 
trimeters or double trimeters, and so hexameters. Yet even 
here we must regard Hebrew poetry as at an earlier stage of 
poetic development than the Syriac. The poet is not bound 
to a certain number of syllables. While in general making the 
syllabic length of the lines correspond with the parallelism of 
the thought and emotion, he does not constrain himself to uni- 
formity as a principle or law of his art ; but increases or dimin- 
ishes the length of his lines in perfect freedom in accordance 
with the rhythmical movements of the thought and emotion 
themselves. The external form is entirely subordinated to the 
internal emotion, which moves on with the utmost freedom, and 
assumes a poetic form merely as a thin veil, which does not so 
much clothe and adorn, as shade and colour the native beauties 
of the idea. This movement of emotion gives rise to a general 
harmony of expression in the parallelism of structure in lines 
1 Dichter, I. pp. 108 seq. 



366 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and strophes — a parallelism which affords a great variety and 
beauty of form. Sometimes the movement is like the wavelets 
of a river flowing steadily and smoothly on, then like the ebb- 
ing and flowing of the tide in majestic antitheses, and again, like 
the madly tossed ocean in a storm, all uniformity and symme- 
try disappearing under the passionate heaving of the deepest 
emotions of the soul. 

TV, Lowth's Doctrine of Parallelism 

The first to clearly state and unfold the essential principle of 
parallelism in Hebrew verse was Bishop Lowth,i although older 
writers, such as Rabbi Asarias, and especially Schottgen,^ called 
attention to various forms of parallelism. Lowth distinguishes 
three kinds : 

1. Synonymous. 

O Jehovah, in Thy strength the king shall rejoice ; 
And in Thy salvation how greatly shall he exult ! 
The desire of his heart Thou hast granted unto him, 
And the request of his lips Thou hast not denied.^ 

2. Antithetical. 

A wise son rejoiceth his father ; 

But a foolish son is the grief of his mother.* 

3. Synthetic. 

Praise ye Jehovah, ye of the earth ; 
Ye sea monsters, and all deeps : 
Fire and hail, snow and vapour, 
Stormy wind, executing His command.^ 

Bishop Lowth also saw that there was some kind of metre in 
Hebrew poetry. He said : ^ 

" Thus much, then, I think, we may be allowed to infer from 
the alphabetical poems ; namely, that the Hebrew poems are writ- 
ten in verse, properly so called ; that the harmony of the verses 
does not arise from rhyme, that is, from similar corresponding 
sounds terminating the verses, but from some sort of rhythm, 
probably from some sort of metre, the laws of which are now 
altogether unknown, and wholly indiscoverable." 

1 De Sacra Poesi Hehr. XIX., 1753 ; also Preliminary Dissertation to his work 
on Isaiah, 1778. 

2 Hor(K Heh., Diss. VI., De Exergasia Sacra. ^ Ps. 21i- 2. 

* Prov. IQi. 5 Ps. \W-^. 6 Isaiah, Preliminary Dissertation, p. vii. 



CHARACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 367 

Bishop Lowth's views have been generally accepted, although 
they are open to various objections ; for the majority of the 
verses are synthetic, and these in such a great variety that it 
seems more important in many cases to classify and distinguish 
them than to make the discriminations proposed by Bishop 
Lowth. There is a general mingling of the three kinds of 
parallelism in Hebrew poetry, so that seldom do the synony- 
mous and antithetical extend beyond a couplet, triplet, or 
quartette of verses. The poet is as free in his use of the 
various kinds of parallelism as in the use of rhyme or metre, 
and is only bound by the principle of parallelism itself. 

4. Bishop Jebb^ added a fourth kind, which he called the 
introverted parallelism, where the first line corresponds with 
the fourth, and the second with the third, thus : 

My son, if thine heart be wise, 

My heart also shall rejoice ; 

Yea, my reins shall rejoice, 
When thy lips speak right things. ^ 

This is a difference in the structure of the strophe and in the 
arrangement of the parallelism, rather than in the parallelism 
itself. We may add two other kinds of parallelism, — the 
emblematic and the stairlike. 

5. The emblematic parallelism is quite frequent in Hebrew 

poetry : 

Eor lack of wood the fire goeth out : 

And where there is no whisperer, contention ceaseth. 

Coal for hot embers, and wood for fire ; 
And a contentious man to inflame strife. ^ 

Take away the dross from silver. 

And there cometh forth a vessel for the finer. 

Take away the wicked from before the king. 

And his throne shall be established in righteousness.* 

6. An unusual but graphic kind of parallelism is the stair- 
like movement, especially characteristic of the Pilgrim Psalms : ^ 

I will lift up mine eyes unto the mountains — from whence cometh my help : 
My help is from Yahweh — Maker of heaven and earth. 

1 Sacred Literature, § iv., 1820. 2 prov. 23i5.i6. 

3 Prov. 2620-21. * Prov. 254^. 5 pg. 120-134. 



368 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

May He not suffer thy foot to be moved ; — may He not slumber, thy Keeper. 

Behold He slumbers not and sleeps not, — the keeper of Israel. 

Yahweh is thy keeper ^ — is thy shade on thy right side ; 

By day the sun will not smite thee, — nor the moon hj night. 

Yahweh will keep thee from every evil — he will keep thee, thyself. 

Hei will keep thy going out and thy coming in — from now on even for ever.2 

The last word of the first line becomes the first word of the 
second. The last two words of the third line are taken np in the 
fourth. The fifth, seventh, and eighth lines repeat the keeper of 
the fourth line. 

An example may be given from the Song of Deborah: ^ 

Curse ye INIeroz, saith the angel of Yahweh, 

Curse ye for ever — the inhabitants thereof ; 

Because they came not — to the help of Yahweh, 

To the help of Yahweh against the mighty. 

Blessed above wives be Jael, 

The wife of Heber the Kenite, 

Above ivives in the tent be she blessed. 

Water he asked — milk she gave ; 

In the lordly dish — she brought him curds ; 

Her hand to the tent pin she put forth, 

And her right hand to the workman's hammer ; 

And she hammered Sisera — she smote through his head. 

And she pierced, and she struck through his temples. 

At her feet he boived, he fell, he lay ; 

At her feet he bowed, he fell ; 

Where he boioed, there he fell slain. 

This parallelism of members was until recently thought to be 
a peculiarity of Hebrew poetry, as a determining principle of 
poetic art, although it is used among other nations for certain 
momentary effects in their poetry ; but recent discoveries have 
proved that the ancient Assyrian, Babylonian, and Akkadian 
hymns have the same dominant feature in their poetry, so that 
the conjecture of Schrader,* that the Hebrews brought it with 
them in their emigration from the vicinity of Babylon, is highly 
probable. Indeed, it is but natural that we should go back of 
the more modern Syriac and Arabic poetry to the more ancient 
Assyrian and Babylonian poetry for explanation of the poetry 
of the Hebrews, which was historically brought into connection 
with the latter and not with the former. Taking these ancient 

1 n^T}"^ has been inserted without reason in the Massoretic text of these two 
passages. 

2 Ps. 121. 3 jd. 523-27. 4 jahrb. f Prot. Theo., I. 122. 



CHARACTERISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 369 

Shemitic poetries together, we observe that they have unfolded 
the principle of parallelism into a most elaborate and ornate 
artistic system. Among other nations it has been known and 
used, but it has remained comparatively undeveloped. Other 
nations have developed the principles of rhyme and metre, 
which were known and used, but remained undeveloped by 
the Hebrews, Assyrians, and Babylonians. 

V. Ley's Theory of Measures 

In addition to the principle of parallelism, others have sought 
a principle of measurement of the verses of Hebrew poetry by 
the accent. Thus Lautwein,^ Ernst Meier,^ and more recently 
Julius Ley.^ The latter has elaborated quite a thorough system, 
with a large number of examples. He does not interfere with 
the Massoretic system, except in changes of the maqqepJi and 
metheg^ and in his theory of a circumflex accentuation in mono- 
syllables at the end of a verse. He arranges Hebrew poetry 
into pentameters, hexameters, octameters, and decameters, with 
a great variety of breaks or caesuras, as, for instance, in the 
octameter, which may be composed of 4+4 tones, or 2 + 6, 3 + 5, 
or 5 + 3. His theory gives longer verses than seem suited to 
the principle of parallelism and the spirit of Hebrew poetry. 
His octameters are, in my opinion, chiefly tetrameters, and his 
decameters pentameters, and many of his pentameters trimeters. 
At the same time his views are in the main correct. He has 
done more to establish correct views of Hebrew poetry than any 
other since Lowth. The accent has great power in Hebrew 
verse. The thought is measured by the throbbings of the soul 
in its emotion, and this is naturally expressed by the beat of the 
accent. The accent has no unimportant part to play in English 
verse, but in Hebrew, as the poetic accent always corresponds 
with the logical accent, and that is as a rule on the ultimate, it 
falls with peculiar power. Even in prose the accent controls 
the vocalization of the entire word, and in pause has double 

1 Versuch einer richtigen Theorie von d. biblischen Verskunst, 1775. 

2 Die Form der Hehr. Foesie, 1853. 

^ Grundzuge d. Bhythmus des Vers- und Strophenhaues in d. Hehr. Foesie, 
1875 ; Leitfaden der Metrik der Hehr. Foesie., 1887. 
2b 



370 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

strength. How much more is this the case in poetry, where 
the emotion expressed by homogeneous sounds causes it to beat 
with exceeding power and wonderful delicacy of movement. 
This can hardly be reproduced or felt to any great extent by 
those who approach the Hebrew as a dead language. We can 
only approximate to it by frequent practice in the utterance of 
its verses. 

In 1881 I published my views of Hebrew poetry, which in 
the main correspond with those of Ley. I could not accept 
his long measures, or the views of substitution and compensa- 
tion, which he has since abandoned. But I have held, with 
increasing firmness in my teaching and writing, that the Hebrew 
poet measured his line by the word accent or word group. ^ 
The Hebrew poet had the liberty of uniting, in a word group, 
two or more short words. The many monosyllables, particles, 
segholates, infinitives, etc., might be used in this way, or might 
be treated as independent words. The particles often assume 
an archaic ending for this purpose, or a conjunction is pre- 
fixed. ^ 

There are, however, long words where the secondary accent 
must be counted in the measure. Such long words are not 
common in Hebrew, but they have to be considered when they 
occur. 3 It should also be said that the Hebrew poet changes 
his measure at times just as the poets of other literatures, in 
order to give variety and force to his style. This is most 
frequent at the beginning or the end of strophes.* 

There has been a strange reluctance on the part of Hebrew 
scholars to recognize the measures of Hebrew poetry, but 
within a few years great advance has been made in this respect 
in all parts of the world. 

'^ Homiletical Quarterly^ London, 1881, pp. 398 seg., 555 seq. ; Biblical 
Study, 1st ed., 1883, pp. 262 seq.; Hehra'ica, five articles on Hebrew poetry, 
1886-1887. 

2 The prefix prepositions jtt, b, 5, ^ might be used as separate words bv giving 
them the ancient form of ''21:2, 1^b,1):23, 1)2^. So also the monosyllables 7^?, bi, 
iy, hv, if they are to be accented as separate words, assume the archaic form 
"•bn, ''b'2, ■'"ir, ^bv. So ^h would be usually if not always toneless ; but vh\ 
K^S, ^h'^'D may receive the accent. (See Ley, Leitfaden^ s. 4 seq.) 

3 For specimens, see Ley, Leitfaden, s. 4, and notes, pp. 382, 383. 

4 See for illustrations pp. 383, 384. 



CHARACTEKISTICS OF BIBLICAL POETRY 371 

Upon these two principles of the parallelism of members and 
the play of the accent the form of Hebrew verse depends. The 
ancient verse divisions have been obscured and lost, even if 
they were ever distinctly marked. We can recover them only 
by entering into the spirit of the poetry, and allowing ourselves 
to be carried on in the flow of emotion, marking its beats and 
varied parallelism. These features of Hebrew poetry make it 
a universal poetry, for the parallelism can be reproduced in 
the main in most languages into which Hebrew poetry may be 
translated, and even the same number of accents may be to a 
great extent preserved ; only that the colouring of the words, 
and the varied rhythm of their utterance, and the strong beat- 
ing of the accent, can only be experienced by a Hebrew scholar 
in the careful and practised reading of the Hebrew text. 

VI. The Poetic Language 

As in all other languages, so in the Hebrew the poetic style 
is elevated, artistic, and cultivated, and hence above the every- 
day talk of the houses and streets. For this purpose it selects 
not the language of the schools, which becomes technical, pe- 
dantic, and artificial, but the older language, which, with its 
simplicity and strong vital energy, is in accord with the poetic 
spirit. 

Thus in the forms of the language there is (a) an occasional 
use of tlie fuller sounding forms, as atJiaJi for aA, of the fem. 
noun ; (5) the older endings of prepositions in hHi for hal^ 
minni for mm, 'ele for 'g?, 'die for 'al^ 'ddhe for 'adh ; (c) the 
older case endings of nouns, as cJiay^tJio for chayyath^ and b^ni 
for hen; (d) the older suffix forms in mo and emo for dm ; (e) 
the fuller forms of the inseparable prepositions Vmd for Z^ ¥m6 
for ¥ ; (/) the nun paragogic or archaic ending of 3 pf. of 
verbs, Hn for iX. 

The style is more primitive, using many archaic expressions 
that have been lost to the classic language. The monuments 
of Assyria and Babylon show us that the earlier Hebrew lan- 
guage was historically in contact with the languages of Syria 
and the Euphrates. The Assyrian and Babylonian shed great 



372 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

light on these poetic archaisms. A later connection of Hebrew 
with Aramaic is indicated in the later historical writings of the 
Bible. The poetic language is also remarkably rich in syno- 
nyms, exceedingly flexible and musical in structure, and thus 
the older forms are retained in these synonyms for variety of 
representation, when they have long passed from use in the 
prose literature. 



CHAPTER XV 

THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 

Hebrew poetry is measured in part by rhyme and assonance, 
but chiefly by the beats of the accents. 

I. Assonance and Rhyme 

Many specimens of word painting may be found in Hebrew 
poetry. The following examples may suffice : 

Psalm 105 is composed of six hexameter strophes of seven 
lines each. Two of these strophes (I. and V.) have rhyme in 
the form of identical suffixes of the noun and verb. This may 
be sufficiently represented in English by the italicized personal 
pronouns. Each line of the first strophe closes with the suffix 
aw; each line before the csesura has the suffix 6 or mo ; each 
line of the fifth strophe closes with the suffix am. 

Strophe I 

give thanks,! proclaim His ^ name — make ^ known among the peoples His * 

doings. 
Sing to Him^ make melody to Him — muse on all His wonders. 
Glory in His holy name — let the heart of them be glad that seek Him.^ 
Resort to Yahweh and His strength — seek continually His face. 

1 miT'b has been inserted to make the ascription more definite ; but it makes 
the line too long, and was unnecessary in the original. 

2 The first half of the line throughout ends in the suffix 1, 3d pers. sing, 
masc. suffix to singular noun, His, except where the infinitive construct is used, 
line 5, and the 3d plural (in 112), line 7. See note on p. 370. 

3 The hexameter always has a caesura. See p. 382. This is indicated by the 
mark — . 

* The line always closes with V, 3d pers. sing. masc. suffix to plural noun, His. 
5 T^'',r\^ ""wpiia for the original V^p^^. The insertion of mn'' makes the line 
too long, 

373 



374 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

RememlDer the wonders of His ^ doing — the judgments of His mouth and His 

marvels ; 2 
Ye seed of Abraham His servant — ye children of Jacob, His chosen ones. 
He is Yahweh their ^ God — in all the earth are His acts of judgment.* 



Strophe V 

Their land swarmed with frogs — in the chambers of their ^ king. 

He said it, and the swarm came — lice in all their border. 

He gave their rains to be hail — flaming fire in their land. 

And He smote their vine and their fig tree — and brake in pieces the tree of 

their border. 
He said it, and the locust came — and the young locust, countless their ^ 

number. 
And did eat up every herb of their land — and did eat up the fruit of their 

ground. 
And he smote all the firstborn in their land — and the firstfruits of all their 

strength.'^ 

The 6th Psahii is an example of the use of the suffix of the 
first person singular, i, at the close of each line except the last 
two of the first strophe, where the change to two lines with kd 

= Thee is effective. 

1. Yahweh, do not in thine anger rebuke me. 
Yahweh, 8 do not in thy heat chasten me. 
Since 9 I am withered i*^ be gracious to me; 
Since ^ my bones are vexed ^o heal me ; 
Yea sorely vexed is ^ my soul. 
And it is come,^! Yahweh, unto my death. 

1 Read intt'l? m^bs: for Hebrew rW)2 nrK vm^b'SS, which is prosaic. 

2 There has been a transposition ; VnS^ goes to the end of the line. The 
scribe has transformed this hexameter line with caesura into a prose line. 

3 Read ^D^^bK for IJ'nb'K. This keeps the rhyme in 0, although 1)2 is 3d plural 
suffix. 4 Ps, 1051-7. 

" Hebrew Dn''5b)2 is evidently a mistake for Q^b^. There is only one king of 
Egj'pt to whom this passage can refer. 

*^ The suffix was unnecessary here, and it was omitted by a scribe who had no 
interest in the rhyme. We should read DISDtt for "nSD^. To give the force in 
English, it is necessary to paraphrase. '^ Ps. 10530-36. 

8 The parallelism requires the insertion of Yahweh. 

9 Transpose the clauses. 

10 Omit Yahweh in these instances. It makes the lines too long, and is 
unnecessary. 

Ji This line is corrupt. Instead of "n^-ny mn^ JnXI read 'tp-^l^ .111^ nX'l. 

The omission of '' in the first word has occasioned the incorrect traditional 
pointing, which yields no good sense. Besides the Massoretic ° over T. , while 
it suggests the nriK of the second singular, really implies a traditional doubt as 
to the form. 



THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 375 

return,! deliver my soul : 

Eor the sake of tliy kindness, 2 save me. 

Eor in death there is no remembrance of thee : 

In Sheol, who will give thanks to thee ? 

2. I am weary with my groaning ; 
All night make I to swim my bed ; 

1 water with my tears ^ my couch. 
Because of grief wasteth away mine eye ; 
It waxeth old because of mine adversary.^ 
All ye workers of iniquity, depart * from me; 
For Yahweh hath heard the voice of my weeping ; 
Yahweh hath heard my supplication ; 

Yahweh receiveth * my prayer. 

They will be ashamed and will be sore vexed all mine ^ enemies. 

There is a fine example of assonance in the first pentameter 

strophe of Ps. 110. 

Utterance of Yahweh to my lord — Sit at my right hand, 
Until I put thine enemies — the stool for thy feet. 
With the rod of thy strength ^ — rule in the midst of thine enemies. 
Thy people will be volunteers — in the day of thy host, on the holy mountains.' 
From the womb of the morning there will be for thee., — the dew of thy young 
men. 

A fine example of word-painting is found in Jd. 5^2 : 

DID ^spy i^bn m 

The movement of the words in utterance is like the wild 
running of horses. 

The most elaborate example of word play is in the great 
apocalypse, Is. 24-27. It is indeed characteristic of this mar- 
vellous hexameter. The force of the original Hebrew can 
hardly be represented in English: 

Tiin :i!im 'pK.i piisn p^'2r^ 24^ 

Hihhoq tihhoq ha'dretz w^ibhoz tibboz. 

bnn rh:i: nbbiisK y^i^rt rb^: nbsK 24* 

''AbhHd ndbhHd hd''dretz, ''umlHd ndbhHd tebhel. 

1 Omit Yahweh in this instance. It makes the line too long, and is unneces- 
sary. 2 Transpose the clauses. 

3 Point singular ''"l'!)^2i for Massoretic "'^t)'!^. * Transpose words. 

^ The change to plural is probably designed at the close of the strophe. The 
last clause of the psalm is a later addition. 

6 "May Yahweh send it forth from Zion," is a gloss of prayer. It breaks 
the movement of the poetry by an abrupt change of subject. 

■^ "'"iin , mountains, instead of ''^ITt , attire : frequent mistake of "I for *I. 



376 STUDY OP HOLY SCRIPTURE 

^b ^ix ^b vn '^b ^n-ix:Ki 2416 

Wa'omar rdzl li rdzi li ^owi li 

Bogh^dhim hdghddhu, wubheghedh hogh^dhim baghddhu. 

Dnxsu? nntrx: d^:)::^:? nn*i:';2 25^ 
appTD n^if2Z' a^nx2X2 d^:^'^^ 

Mishte sh^mdnim, mislite sh^mdrim 
Sh^mdnim m^muclidyim sh^mdrim m^zuqqdqim. 

jnn rTra T\r{^ as* insn ins;:: nrasn 277 

"As the smiting of those that smote him hath he smitten him ? or as the slaying 
of them that were slain by him is he slain ? ' ' 

Sometimes great force is produced in a poem by the change 
of a single letter of a word in word play. 

At the brooks of Reuben were great decrees of mind. 
Wliy didst thou dwell among the sheepfolds, 
Listening to the bleatings of the flocks ? 
At the brooks of Reuben were great searcMngs of mind. 

This tetrastich begins and closes with the same identical line, 
except that for the word ^ppH, decrees, we have ^*lpn, searchings. 
There is a single letter changed, p to ^, to emphasize the trans- 
formation of the bold mental decrees into the timid, hesitating 
searchings of the mind.^ 

II. The Measures by Word or Accent 

The Hebrew poet measured his lines by the beats of the 
accent, or by word, or word-groups, as did ancient Babylonian 
and Egyptian poets. Accordingly three beats of the accent 
give us trimeters, four tetrameters, five pentameters, and six 
hexameters. All these measures appear in Hebrew poetry, as 
they do in Babylonian and Egyptian poetr3^ There are no 
dimeter lines, except occasionally in connection with trimeters 
and tetrameters to vary the measure. 

1. The Trimeter 

The trimeter is the most frequent measure, especially in the 
more ancient historical poetry, and in the Psalter, and in 
the Wisdom Literature. The alphabetical j)oems enable us to 

1 Jd. 5i5-i^. Geo. Moore in his Commentary on Judges thinks the second line 
a mistaken repetition of the first, and that it gives the true, original text. I 
cannot agree with him. 



THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 



377 



stud}^ the trimeters, as the lines are limited by the letters 
of the alphabet in their progress. The first example will be 
taken from the alphabetical Ps. 9, where there is a double 
limitation by the letter Aleph and by the rhyme in the 
suffix Ka. 

Each line begins with the first person of the cohortative imper- 
fect of the verb and with the letter Aleph ; each line closes with 
the suf6.x of the second singular noun. Here, then, the lines are 
distinctly marked at the beginning and at the end by words in 
assonance. One Avord only remains in each line between the two. 
These lines are measured by three words or three word accents. 
Psalm 111 is a fine example of an alphabetical psalm : 



n'^: 


n^n3 7 


rfnb 


jb^ 


ifb-bDn 


nni« 


ts£t:^^i 


n^K 


rtrr^ s 


mi;i 


nntr^ 


nicn 


vnipD' 


bS 


D^5>2K3 


niT 


■'trub 


d^'ria 


D^iub 


nub 


Q^fl^D 


vfane 


b5b 


D^t^nn 


iti?''! 


n^Kn 




i'tub 


nnm 


nrr 


iipub 


fh^ 


nna 


nub 


rn^i? 


liipnsti 


inns 


D^iub 


n^2£ 


rniKbaob 


ntri? 


naf 


ii^tr 


K"niD1 


^np 


nfi^ 


Dinm 


pin 








rxTb 






9inxT 


T^l2'Dn 


n^tr«n 


|n5 


f]-itfi 


D.-i^tri? 


b5> 


;n£-b5ii^ 


innn 


abiub 


nfr 


^vb 


r\i6:s 


inb.in 


fDub 


n^in 


rtrr^-ns 



1 "Yahweh" has been inserted in the Massoretic text, as usual in such 
circumstances. In use in worship the reference to Yahweh was plain enough. 
For private reading it seemed necessary to the scribe to insert it. 

2 "^b has been omitted by the Massoretic text. It is implied by the Greek aoL 

3 The long word '^■'jTIIKt'BD has two accents, therefore b'D is to be attached to 
it by Maqqeph. 

* There has been a transposition of jvbu and ^^ti^ by a scribe who did not 
understand the rhyme and who followed the prose order of words. 

5 The Greek version has croi, which implies either an interpretation, or ^b in 
the text, nin'' has been inserted as usual, but it makes the line a tetrameter. 
It is possible that the poet has increased his measure here, for sometimes trim- 
eters begin with tetrameters, but it is not probable. 

6 The Greek version has deKrifiaTa avrov = VitSH, which is more probable than 
the Hebrew D.T'StSn, '^ UTib has been inserted for preciseness of statement. 

8 VT' •'il^Utt makes the line a tetrameter. It is improbable ; read Vtl^UD. 

9 mn"' nxn'', in the Hebrew stands for an original inX1\ 



378 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The lines are distinctly separated by the fact that each one 
begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and they continue 
in the order of the alphabet until the psalm is complete in 
twenty-two lines. Each line has three accented words. ^ 

Psalm 112 is also an alphabetical psalm of exactly the same 
structure as Ps. 111. 

In the Hebrew manuscripts there is a separation of lines in 
Deut. 32, 33; 2 Sam. 22; Ps. 18, which indicates that these 
are all trimeters. The poems ascribed to Balaam ^ are also 
trimeters, although there is nothing in the text itself to show it. 

A fine example of the trimeter may be given from the Egyp- 
tian poem called the Hymn to the Nile : 

Adoration to the Nile ! 

Hail to tliee, Nile ! 

Who manifesteth thyself over this land, 

And comest to give life to Egypt ! 

Mysterious is thy issuing forth from the darkness, 

On this day v^hereon it is celebrated ! 

Watering the orchards created by Ra, 

To cause all the cattle to live. 

Thou givest the earth to drink, inexhaustible one ! 

Path that descendest from the sky, 

Loving the bread of Seb and the firstf ruits of Nepera, 

Thou causest the workshops of Pthah to prosper. ^ 

A French scholar says of this poem : 

" The text of the Hymn is divided into fourteen verses, intro- 
duced by red letters, and each, with two exceptions, containing 
the same number of complete phrases, separated from one another 
by red points. Unfortunately we are still ignorant of the rules 
of Egyptian poetry, but as the variant readings show that the 
number of syllables in one and the same sentence is not the same 
in the different texts, it is probable that the tonic accent played a 
chief part in it."'^ 

Erman,^ the distinguished Egyptologist of Berlin, also says 
that Egyptian poetry is measured by the tonic accent, and that 
there is a vast amount of poetry in Egyptian literature. 

1 No emendation is necessary in the Hebrew text. The use of the Maqqeph 
is sufficient in lines 1, 11, 12, 13, 20, 21. But it is probable that in some of 
these lines there has been a slight corruption of the original text, as I have 
indicated in the notes. 

2 Nu. 23"««3' 18-24. 3 Becords of the Past, new edition. III. 48. 
* Paul Guieysse, Becords of the Past, III. p. 47. 

s Life in Ancient Egypt, 1894, p. 395. 



THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 379 

2. The Tetrameter 

The tetrameter is composed of four beats of the accent or 
word-groups. It is usually divided by a caesura in the middle. 
The following specimen of an ancient Babylonian hymn may 
suitably introduce the subject : ^ 

In heaven who is great ? — Thou alone art great. 

On earth who is great ? — Thou alone art great. 

Where Tliy voice resounds in heaven — the gods fall prostrate. 

Where Thy voice resounds on earth — the genii kiss the dust. 

This resembles in some respects the ode of the Red Sea.^ The 
latter has a refrain which does not appear at the close of the 
strophes, but is given apart from them. It should be placed at 
the close of the strophes. The strophes increase, the second 
strophe being twice the length of the first, and the third strophe 
three times its length. The movement is clearly tetrameter, 
with the caesura in the midst of each line. 

Strophe I 

D^i nan-insm did 



I Refrain. 



D^ ix:DD--[nnn natrj 



D^s nan-iDDm D' 



Strophe II 

yf2p D-lnn-^3^^^*J nnm 



^Refrain 



1 Transactions Soc. Bib. Arch., IL p. 62. 2 Ex. 15. 

* ITT' is a prosaic insertion, 

* The caesura is striking in each of these lines. The arrangement agrees with 
the usual division of the lines, except in the second line, which is divided in the 
Massoretic text into two lines, spoiling the movement. 

5 There is no departure from the tetrameter movement in this long strophe. 
In most of the lines the caesura is plain. In the Massoretic text, lines 5, 6, 7 
are changed into trimeters by the misuse of the Maqqeph. 



380 



STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 



Strophe III 



nnsi nnia^K-aTbi? ban 
D"3 n^n-inDm did. 



Refrain. 



m.T Dbxi ,1DDD ^tt 

:rnp2 n-ixi-nD!aD ^^ 
nbxj irDu-^nDHD n^ro 

nun i):2Tni«^-DXiX2 ^'^^'K 



Psalm 13 gives an example of a tetrameter, where the begin- 
ning of the lines in the first strophe is marked by an identical 
phrase, and the lines conclude with rhyme : 

How long, Yahweh, — forever ^ wilt thou forget me 9 

How long wilt thou hide thy face from me f 

How long shall I take counsel in my soul ? 

How long* shall I have sorrow — by day ^ in my heart ? 

How long shall he he exalted — over me ^ he mine enemy ? 

There are not so many examples of the tetrameter in Hebrew 
poetry as of the other measures. There are few in the Psalter. 
Fine specimens, however, are the Song of Deborah,^ the Lament 
of David over Jonathan,^ and Pss. 1, 4, 7, 12, 16, 45, 46, 58. 



8. The Pentameter 

The pentameter has five beats of the accent, or five word- 
groups. There is always a caesura, usually after the third beat, 
but sometimes for variety after the second beat. 

The epic of the Descent of Istar to Sheol is a fine example 

1 It is improbable that this line only should be trimeter. Insert D^jl in accord- 
ance with parallelism. 

2 We now have a supplementary line which seems not to have belonged to 
the original poem. It is just such a liturgical supplement as we often find in 
the Psalter. The Massoretic text reduces a few of the lines to trimeters by an 
improper use of the Maqqeph. In the last line mn"' is to be preferred to ^HK. 

3 These three cases are transpositions made by the scribe, who did not discern 
the rhyme, and so followed the prose order of words. The restoration of the 
original order restores the caesuras also. 

* HDi^'IU is restored in this line. The Massoretic text omits it. It is improb- 
able that the original lacked it. ^ Jd. 5. ^ 2 Sam. l^^-^^. 



THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 381 

of the pentameter in Babylonian poetry. ^ The following ex- 
tract may suffice : 

To the land without return — the region of darkness, 

Istar, daughter of Sin — her face did set ; 

Yea, the daughter of Sin — did set lier face 

To the house of darkness — the abode of Irkalla, 

To the house whose entering — knows no going out again, 

To the path whose way — has no returning, 

To the house which cuts off — him entering it from light, 

Where dust is their nourishment — their food is slime, 

Light is never beheld — in darkness they dwell : 

They are clothed like the birds — their garments are wings. 

On the door and its bolt — is lying the dust. 

The pentameter is the most frequent measure in Hebrew 
poetry, next to the trimeter. This is the measure which is 
called by Budcle the Kina measure, because apparently he first 
noticed it in the book of Lamentations. But, in fact, there is 
no propriety in this name. The earliest Hebrew dirge, the 
Lament of David over Jonathan, is not in this measure, but in 
the tetrameter ; and on the other side this measure is not espe- 
cially adapted to the dirge. All kinds of poetry appear in this 
measure. It seems especially adapted to didactic poems, such 
as Ps. 119. 

The pentameter line is often treated as if it were composed of 
two lines in parallelism. But the second half of the pentameter 
line is not in such marked parallelism with the first as the 
second line of a trimeter poem. It is rather supplementary to 
the first half, even when parallelism appears. 

A fine specimen of the pentameter is the alphabetical dirge 
contained in Lam. 3. The dirge has twenty -two strophes, in 
which the initial letter of the strophe is a letter in the order of 
the Hebrew alphabet. But the alphabetical structure is not 
confined to the initial letters of the strophes. Each strophe 
contains three lines, and each line begins with the characteris- 
tic letter of the strophe. Four of these strophes will suffice as 
specimens of the twenty-two. Bickell makes these lines of 
twelve syllables in accordance with his theory of the structure 
of Hebrew verse. In general, his lines of twelve syllables 
correspond with our pentameter. 

1 r. Brown, " Religious Poetry of Babylona " in Presbyterian Review, 1888, p. 69. 



382 



STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 









ably TO3-^3£'''Dini a^frn^n 



The great alphabetical poem in praise of the Divine Word, 
Ps. 119, has twenty-two strophes, and each strophe is com- 
posed of eight lines, and each line of the strophe begins Avitli 
the characteristic letter of the strophe. The pentameter move- 
ment is clear, and the lines are distinctly marked off by the 
letters of the alphabet. Bickell regards the lines of this poem 
also as composed of twelve syllables. 



I'rKtanK K^riu^b -irh^x ^reai: 'Shn 
"fa ^'^zvf2'b6^-^r\^£a ■'natrn 






4. The Sexameter 

The Hebrew hexameter is a double trimeter. The caesura 
ordinarily divides the line in the middle. Hence it is not 
always easy to decide whether the line is a hexameter or two 
trimeters. But there are several helps to the decision of this 
question : (a) The hexameter line is occasionally divided by 
the caesura into 4 + 2 or 2 + 4. (6) There will also be exam- 

1 This word has two accents, on account of the nnmber of long vowels. 

2 The only changes in the Massoretic text are insertion of Maqqephs in lines 
1, 3, 7, 8, 10, all of which are in accordance with good usage. The lines have 
the csesuras after the third beat of the accent, except lines 5 and 12. 

3 These are all long words with two accents, both of which are counted in the 
measure. 

* The Hebrew language prefers "l^T'^^an to "[Tl ^^')2n. It is improbable 
that the line is hexameter. Read therefore miriD instead of HIT nilflS. The 
divine name is unnecessary. 

5 The Maqqephs are changed in lines 3, 6, of the « strophe, and in lines 3, 5, 8, 
of the '2 strophe. These need no justification. 



THE MEASURES OF BIBLICAL POETRY 383 

pies of two caesuras dividing the line into 2 + 2 + 2. (c) Pen- 
tameter lines will be found to vary the movement. As the 
poet will sometimes shorten his trimeter into a dimeter, his 
tetrameter into a trimeter, and his pentameter into a tetrame- 
ter, so there are occasional pentameter lines in hexameter 
poems. (6?) The second half of the line will be complement- 
ary to the first half, and the parallelism will be between the hex- 
ameter lines. I shall use as an illustration " the golden ABC 
of women." 1 

nianb K'in pni^^-nniD nf^Ka nrrn 
n''ri"ii>3b pm-nn'nb p]"-i£-f.nm-nb^'r-nya opni 

^ii^DDb nih: mirn-^isbm nm?u pD 

jnnK avS pnWm-nt^nb nTii ni? 

™T^b"by "iDn mfm-n^iDnn nnns n^a 

'rfxn-Kb mb^ki; Dnbl-nn^n m£b^^ .Tai2£ 

n^bn^i nb1;i nia^b^-nin^K^i ,Tin i^p 

n:bVbi? n^bl? n^i - b'^nnri; m:3 nun 

'^bnnn xv7-nfi^"nKT ,Ti?K-*svi"bnm frn-ipt2^ 

There are also alphabetical psalms in the hexameter move- 
ment. Psalm 145 has twenty-two alphabetical hexameter lines. 
Psalm 37 has twenty-two alphabetical hexameter coui^lets. 

1 Prov. 3110-31. 2 These long words have two accents. 

2 ''a has come into the Massoretic text by dittography. 

* The Waw consec implies a verb, and the measure is just this much too 
short. I have ventured to insert 1X217 as parallel with 1X2p. 

5 This beautiful alphabetical poem might be taken as composed of alphabetical 
trimeter distichs so far as most of the poem is concerned, for the caesura is in the 
middle of the line in all cases except three lines. But lines ^ and "^ have two 
caesuras, and line S has a csesura after the fourth beat. 



384 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

There are many other hexameter psalms. It is a favourite 
measure of later prophecy. Thus the beautiful hymn, Is. 60, 
and the magnificent apocalypse, Is. 24-27, are in this measure.^ 

5. Varying Measures 

There are a few cases in which the measure varies in the 
several strophes. The simplest and finest example of these is 
Ps. 23, which in the first strophe is trimeter, in the second 
tetrameter, and in the third pentameter. 

1. Yahweh is-my-shepherd : I-cannot-want. 
In-pastures of-green-grass He-causeth-me-to-lie-down ; 
Unto-waters of -refreshment He-leadeth-me ; 

Me-myself Ile-restoreth.^ 

2. He-guideth-me in-patlis of-righteousness for-his-name's-sake. 
Also when-I-walk in-tlie-valley of-dense-darkness 
I-fear-not evil, for-Thou-art with-me : 

Thy-rod and-Thy-staff they comfort-me. 

3. He-prepareth before-me a-table in-the-presence-of my-adversaries ; 
Has-He-anointed with-oil my-head; my-cup is-abundance. 
Surely-goodness and-mercy pursue-me all-the-days of-my-life, 
And-I-shall-return ^ (to-dwell)-in-the-house-of Yahweh for-length of-days.* 

We have seen that Hebrew poetry has its measures as clearly 
and accurately marked as other poetry. Great light is thrown 
upon the meaning of a multitude of passages by arranging the 
IDoetry in accordance with its true measures. And it is a sure 
guide to glosses inserted by later editors in the text. We are 
yet in the infancy of this study. Great fruit may be antici- 
pated from the prosecution of it in the future. 

1 See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy^ 7th ed., pp. 296 seg., 394 seg., where these 
hexameters are arranged in measures and strophes. 

2 A broken line ; a dimeter. 

3 A pregnant term implying the verb " dwell," which has been inserted. 

^ I have here indicated the number of accents by combining in English the 
words combined in Hebrew. 



CHAPTER XVI 

THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 

The great formative principle of Hebrew poetry is the par- 
allelism of members. These members vary from the couplet 
to the strophe of fourteen lines. Seldom does the strophe 
extend beyond this number of lines. However numerous the 
lines may be, and however the strophes and larger divisions of 
a poem may be arranged, the principle of parallelism determines 
the whole. 

I. The Couplet 

The simplest form of the parallelism of members is seen in 
the couplet, or distich, where two lines balance one another in 
thought and its formal expression. The couplet is seldom used 
except in brief, terse, gnomic utterances. 

1. The simplest form of the couplet is the synonymous 
couplet. 

The following specimens of the synonymous couplets may 
suffice : 

The liberal soul shall be made fat : 

And he that watereth shall be watered also himself. i 

The evil bow before the good ; 

And the wicked at the gates of the righteous.^ 

A man hath joy in the answer of his mouth : 
And a word in due season, how good it is ! ^ 

A merchant shall hardly keep himself from doing wrong ; 
And an huckster shall not be freed from sin.* 

Saul smote his thousands, 
And David his myriads. ^ 

1 Prov. 1125. 2 prov. 14i9. 3 prov. 1523. 4 Ecclus. 2623. 

5 1 Sam. 187. 

2 c 385 



386 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

2. Antithetical couplets are numerous and varied : 

A wise son maketli glad his father ; 

But a foolish son is the grief of his mother. 

Treasures of wickedness profit not ; 

But righteousness delivereth from death. 

Yahweli will not let the desire of the righteous famish ; 

But the craving of the wicked He disappointeth. 

He becometh poor that worketh with an idle hand ; 

But the hand of the diligent maketh rich. 

He that gathereth in fruit harvest is a wise son ; 

But he that lies in deep sleep in grain harvest is a base son.^ 

In the second of these couplets the antithesis is throughout: 
^^Eighteousness" to "treasures of wickedness," and "delivereth 
from death" to "profit not." Usually, however, there are one or 
more synonymous terms to make the antithesis more emphatic. 
In the fourth couplet " hand " is a common term, and the contrast 
is of "idle" and "diligent," "becometh poor" and "maketh rich." 
In the third couplet " Yahweh" is a common term with "He," and 
" desire " synonymous with " craving," in order to the antithesis 
of "righteous " with "wicked," and of "will not let famish" with 
"disappointeth." In the first couplet "son" is a common term; 
" father " and " mother " are synonymous, in order to the antithesis 
of "wise" and "foolish," "maketh glad" and "grief." In the 
fifth couplet " son " is a common term, " fruit harvest " is synony- 
mous with " grain harvest," whereas " wise " has as its antithesis 
" base," and " gathereth " " lies in deep sleep." 

Sometimes the antithesis is limited to a single term : 

Man's heart deviseth his way ; 
But Yahweh directeth his steps.2 

Here the contrast is between " man's heart " and " Yahweh " ; the 
remaining terms are synonymous. 

The antithesis sometimes becomes more striking in the anti- 
thetical position of the terms themselves : 

He that spareth his rod, hateth his son ; 

But he that loveth him seeketh him chastisement. ^ 

The common terms are " father " and " son," the antithetical, 
" spareth his rod " with " seeketh him chastisement," and " hateth" 
with " loveth " ; but that which closes the first line begins the 
second, and that which begins the first closes the second. 

The following additional specimens from the Wisdom of Jesus 
may be studied. 

1 Prov. 101-5. 2 prov. 169. 3 prov. 132*. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 387 

Whosoever exalteth himself shall be humbled ; 
But whosoever humbleth himself shall be exalted, i 

Unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance ; 
But from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. 2 

Think not that I came to destroy the law ; 
I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. ^ 

3. Parallelism is ordinarily progressive in that great variety 
of form which such a rich and powerful language as the Hebrew 
renders possible. 

The blessing of Eebekah by her brothers^ is a progressive dis- 
tich: 

thou our sister, become thousands of myriads, 

And may thy seed inherit the gate of those that hate them. 

The second line sums up the ^' thousands of myriads " of the 
first, in order to give the climax of the wish, in the inheritance of 
the gate of their enemies. 

The words of Moses when the ark of the covenant set forward 
and when it rested are couplets.^ 

Arise, Yahweh, and let Thine enemies be scattered ; 
And let those who hate Thee flee from before Thee. 

Return, Yahweh, 

To the myriads of thousands of Israel. 

The first of these couplets is synonymous throughout; the 
second is an example of an unfinished line ; the pause in the poet- 
ical movement is to give more emphasis to the second line when 
its advanced idea is expressed. 

The following additional specimens will illustrate the variations 
possible in the synthesis. 

The fear of Yahweh is a fountain of life, 
To depart from the snares of death.^ 

The eyes of Yahweh are in every place, 
Keeping watch upon the evil and the good.'^ 

Watch and pray lest ye enter into temptation : 
The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.^ 

Till heaven and earth pass away, 

Not one yodh shall pass away from the law.^ 

1 Mt. 2312 = Lk. 1411, 1814. 2 Mt. 2529zz:Mk. 425 ; Lk. 8I8, 1926. 

3 Mt. 51"^. " Prophets " in the first line is a later addition to the text which 
has nothing to justify it in the context. * Gen. 24^'). 

5 Num. 1035. 36. 6 Prov. 1427. 7 prov. 15^. 8 Mk. 1438 ^ Mt. 264i. 

9 Mt. 518 = Lk. 1617. The ^ jxia nepia of Matthew is not in Luke, and is not 
original. It makes the line too long. 



388 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

4. There are many emblematic couplets : 

A word fitly spoken, 

Is like apples of gold in baskets of silver. 

As an earring of gold and an ornament of fine gold, 
So is a wise reprover upon an obedient ear.i 

As cold water to a thirsty soul, 

So is good news from a far country. 2 

They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick : 
I came not to call the righteous, but on the contrary, sinners.^ 

The book of Proverbs in its first great collection contains 
376 couplets, of every variety.* The second great collec- 
tion is also composed chiefly of couplets, although specimens 
of other forms occur. ^ The Wisdom of Jesus has a large num- 
ber also.^ 

II. The Triplet 

The tristich, or triplet, of three lines is not common in He- 
brew poetry. There are only eight in the entire book of 
Proverbs.'^ 

1. The synonymous triplet is most frequent. 

The priests' blessing is a fine specimen of a synonymous tris- 
tich. 

Yahweh bless thee and keep thee ; 

Yahweh let His face shine upon thee and be gracious to thee ; 

Yahweh lift up His face upon thee and give thee peace. ^ 

The oldest of the sayings of the Jewish Fathers is of this form : 

Be deliberate in judgment. 
And raise up many disciples, 
And make a fence to the Law.^ 

Jesus uses this form also. 

Ask and it shall be given unto you ; 

Seek, and ye shall find ; 

Knock, and it shall be opened unto you. 

1 Prov. 2511- 12. 6 prov. 25-29. 

2 Prov. 2525. 6 See pp. 69, 86. 

s Mk. 217 = Mt. 912 = Lk. S^i- 32. 7 Prov. 2229, 258- 13. 20.^ 2710- 22., 2810, 3020. 
* Prov. 10-221'^. 8 Num. 62*-26. 

9 Pirqe Aboth P. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 389 

This is followed by another triplet, progressive to it. 

For every one that asketh, receiveth, 

And he that seeketh, findeth, 

And to him that knocketh it shall be opened, i 

2. The antithetical triplet takes the form of one antithetical 
line to two other lines. Sometimes the antithesis appears in 
one line, sometimes in another. 

These examples will sufl8.ce : 

Seest thou a man diligent in his business ? 

He shall stand before kings ; 

He shall not stand before mean men.2 

Thine own friend, and thy father's friend, forsake not ; 

But go not to thy brother's house in the day of thy calamity : 

Better is a neighbor that is near than a brother far off.^ 

The foxes have holes. 

And the birds of the heaven nests ; 

But the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.* 

3. Progressive triplets are more frequent, but the progres- 
sion is seldom thorough-going. 

These specimens show the variety of method : 

Go not forth hastily to strive, 

Lest in the end, therefore, what wilt thou do. 

When thy neighbour hath put thee to shame ? ^ 

Be ye of the disciples of Aaron : 
Loving peace and pursuing peace. 
Loving mankind and bringing them nigh.^ 

4. The emblematic tristich may be illustrated by the fol- 
lowing specimens : 

As the cold of snow in the time of harvest, 

So is a faithful messenger to them that send him ; 

For he refresheth the soul of his masters.'^ 

As one that taketh off a garment in cold weather, 

And as vinegar upon nitre ; 

So is he that singeth songs to an heavy heart.s 

1 Mt. V-». 3 Prov. 2710. 5 Prov. 258. 7 Pjqv. 2513. 

2 Prov. 2229. * Mt. 820 _ Lk. 959. 6 pirqe Aboth lis. 8 Prov. 2520. 



390 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



III. The Tetrastich 

The tetrastich is formed from the distich, and consists gen- 
erally of pairs balanced over against one another, but some- 
times of three lines against one ; rarely there is a steady march 
of thought to the end. 

The oracle respecting Jacob and Esau^ is an example of bal- 
anced pairs : 

Two nations are in thy womb, 

And two peoples will separate themselves from thy "bowels ; 

And people will prevail over people, 

And the elder will serve the younger. 

The pairs are synonymous within themselves, but progressive with 
reference to one another. 

The blessing of Ephraim by Jacob is an example of antithetical 

pairs : 

He also will become a people. 

And he also will grow great ; 

But yet the younger will become greater, 

And his seed abundance of nations.^ 

The song of the well is an interesting and beautiful example of 
a more involved kind of parallelism, where the second and third 
lines constitute a synonymous pair ; while at the same time, as a 
pair, they are progressive to the first line, and are followed by a 
fourth line progressive to themselves : 

Spring up well ! Sing to it ! 
Well that princes have dug ; 
The nobles of the people have bored, 
With sceptre, with their staves.^ 

The dirge of David over Abner presents a similar specimen, 
where, however, the first and fourth lines are synonymous with 
one another, as well as the second and third lines ; 

Was Abner to die as a fool dieth ? 
Thy hands were not bound, 
And thy feet were not put in fetters : 
As one falling before the children of wickedness, thou didst fall.* 

A fine example of a tetrastich, progressive throughout, is found 

1 Gen. 2523. 

2 Gen. 4819. The measures of the last two lines are spoiled by the later pro- 
saic insertion of ''"nb>, Milt2, and n'.T, none of which are needed for the sense. 

3 Nu. 211"- 18. 4 2 Sam. 333-34. 



THE PARALLELISMS OE HEBREW POETRY 391 

in the extract from an ancient ode describing the Gadites who 
joined David's band : 

Heroes of valour, men, a host, 

For battle, wielders of shield and spear ; 

And their faces were faces of a lion, 

And like roes upon the mountains for swiftness, i 

The blessing of Abram by Melchizedek is composed of two pro- 
gressive couplets : 

Blessed be Abram of God Most High, 

Founder of heaven and earth ; 

And blessed be God Most High, 

Who hath delivered thine adversaries into thine hand. 2 

The tetrastich is quite frequent in Proverbs. The little sup- 
plementary collection of the Words of the Wise ^ has no fewer 
than fourteen of them.* The second great collection of the 
proverbs of Solomon^ has four examples,^ the words of Agur 
one,'' and the collection of Aluqa one.^ 

These may suffice as specimens : 

The eye that mocketh at his father, 
And despiseth to obey his mother, 
The ravens of the valley shall pick it out, 
And the young eagles shall eat it.^ 

The second couplet gives the punishment for the sin of violation 
of the parental law, which violation is stated in the first couplet. 

The following tetrameter is a fine specimen of two couplets, in 
which the first gives the comparison, the second the explanation : 

Take away the dross from the silver. 

And there cometh forth a vessel for the finer. 

Take away the wicked from before the king, 

And his throne shall be established in righteousness.® 

A third specimen is also of two couplets : 

If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat ; 
And if he be thirsty, give him water to drink : 
For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, 
And Yahweh shall reward thee.^^ 

The second couplet gives the reasons for the conduct recom- 
mended in the first. 

1 1 Chr. 128. 2 Gen. 14i9. 3 Prov. 2217-24. 

4 Prov. 2222-23. 24-25. 26-27 231^11- ^^1^- l^^^. 17-18^ 241-2- 3-4. 5-6. 15-16. 17-18. 19-20. 21-22, 

5 Prov. 25-29. ' ^ Prov. 30^. ^ Prov. 25«. 

6 Prov. 254-5. 9-10. 21-22 264-5. 8 Prov. 30i7. 10 prov. 2521-22. 



392 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Jesus gives many sentences of this type : 

No household servant i can have two masters : 
For either he will hate the one and love the other ; 
Or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. 
Ye cannot serve God and Mammon .2 

This is a fine specimen of introverted parallelism. The following 
have two progressive couplets : 

Every idle word that men speak, 

They shall give account thereof in ^ the judgment ; 

For by thy words thou shalt be justified, 

And by thy words thou shalt be condemned.* 

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, 
Neither cast your pearls before the swine, 
Lest haply they trample them under their feet, 
And turn and rend you.^ 

An interesting specimen of the tetrastich is : ^ 

If ^ ye forgive men their trespasses, 
Your Father ^ will also forgive you your trespasses ; ^ 
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, 
Neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. 

This is composed of two antithetical couplets. It is inserted by 
Matthew immediately after the Lord's Prayer. But it is not 
given by Luke in that context. 



IV. The Pentastich 

The pentastich is usually a combination of the distich and 
tristich. A beautiful specimen is given in a strophe of an ode 
of victory over the Canaanites at Bethhoron, which has been 
lost.io 

1 Matthew omits olKerrjs of Luke, probably in order to generalize, as usual in 
his collection of the Wisdom of Jesus (Mt. 5-7). 2 Mt. 62* = Lk. 16i3. 

3 It is common in Matthew to insert day before judgment in order to make 
the reference more distinct to the ultimate day of doom. See my Messiah of 
the Gospels, p. 240. 

4 Mt. 1236-37. 5 Mt. 76. 6 Mt. 614-15 = Mk. 1125-26. 

■7 The connective yap has been inserted in order to attach the logion to its 
context in the Gospel. 

8 The evangelist inserts "heavenly " before Father in the first couplet, but 
not in the second. This is in accord with the peculiar usage of our Matthew. 
See my Messiah of the Gospels, p. 79. 

^ Matthew omits "trespasses" in the second line, but the measure requires 
it, as well as the antithetical statement in the fourth line. 

10 Jos. 1012-13. See p. 337, where it is cited. 



THE PARALLELISMS OE HEBREW POETRY 393 

The oracle^ with, which Amasai joined David's band is an exam- 
ple of the same kind, save that the fifth line is progressive to the 
previous four lines : 

Thine are we, David, 
And with thee, son of Jesse. 
Peace, peace to thee. 
And peace to thy helpers ; 
For thy God doth help thee. 

The song of Sarah gives a couplet and triplet : 

Laughter hath God made for me. 
Whosoever heareth will iaugh with me. 
Wlio could have said to Abraham : 
Sarah doth suckle children ? 
Eor I have borne a son for his old age. 2 

The pentastich is rare in the book of Proverbs. I have noted 
four specimens.^ The last is a good one : 

Put not thyself forward in the presence of the king, 

And stand not in the place of great men ; 

For better is it that it be said unto thee, Come up hither ; 

Than that thou shouldst be put lower in the presence of the prince 

Whom thine eyes have seen. 

Here the triplet gives the reason for the recommendation in the 
couplet, which begins the quintet. 

There are several specimens in the Sayings of the Jewish 
Fathers. I shall give two : 

Be not as slaves that minister unto the Lord, 
With a view to receive recompense ; 
But be as slaves that minister to the Lord 
Without a view to receive recompense ; 
And let the fear of heaven be upon you.* 

This tetrameter is a finer specimen than we have found in Prov- 
erbs. It is composed of two antithetical couplets, and a conclud- 
ing line of exhortation synthetic to both. 

Here is a still finer specimen of the tetrameter pentastich — 
an antithetical pair : 

1. More flesh, more worms ; 
More treasures, more care ; 
More maid-servants, more lewdness ; 
More men-servants, more thefts ; 
More women, more witchcrafts. 

1 1 Chr. 1218. 3 prov. 234-5, 2413-1*' 23-26^ 256-'. 

2 Gen. 216^. * Pirqe Aboth l^. 



394 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

2. More law, more life ; 

More wisdom, more scholars : 
More righteousness, more peace ; 

He who has gotten a name, hath gotten a good thing for himself ; 
He who has gotten words of law, hath gotten for himself the life of 
the world to come.^ 

The following is the best specimen of introverted ^ parallelism 
that can be found in the entire range of Wisdom Literature : 

All men cannot receive this saying, but they to whom it is given ; 

For there are eunuchs which were so born from their mother's womb, 

And there are eunuchs which were made eunuchs by men. 

And there are eunuchs which made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the 

kingdom of God : 
He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.^ 



V. The Hexastich 

The hexastich may consist of three couplets, two triplets, 
and other various combinations. A few specimens will suffice, 
as others will be given in connection with the study of the 
strophe. 

The blessing of the sons of Joseph by Jacob is a fine hexar 
stich : 

The God before whom my fathers walked — Abraham and Isaac, 

The God who acted as my shepherd — from the first even to this day, 

The Malakh who redeemed me from every evil — bless the lads : 

And let my name be named in them. 

And the name of my fathers, — Abraham and Isaac ; 

And let them increase to a great multitude — in the midst of the land.* 

The first tristich is in its three lines synonymous so far as the 
first half of the lines, but in the second half there is a steady march 
to the climax. The second tristich is synonymous in its first 
and second lines, where the leading idea of the name is varied 
from Jacob himself to Abraham and Isaac, but the third line is 
an advance in thought. 

Isaac's blessing of Esau is also a hexastich : 

Lo, far from the fatness of the earth will thy dwelling-place be, 

And far from the dew of heaven above, 

And by thy sword wilt thou live ; 

And thy brother wilt thou serve. 

And it will come to pass when thou wilt rove about. 

Thou wilt break off his yoke from upon thy neck.^ 

1 Pirqe Aboth 28. 2 See p. 367. ^ Mt. 1 911-12. 

4 Gen. 4815-16. 5 Gen. 2789-^1 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 395 

There are ten hexastichs in the book of Proverbs.^ I shall 
give one specimen : 

Deliver them that are carried away unto death, 

And those that are ready to be slain see that thou hold back. 

If thou say est, Behold, we knew not this, 

Doth not He that weigheth the hearts consider it ? 

And He that keepeth thy soul, doth He not know it : 

And shall not He render to every one according to his work ? 2 

In Ben Sirach we find the following : 

Any plague but the plague of the heart ; 

Any wickedness but the wickedness of a woman ; 

Any affliction but the affliction from them that hate me ; 

Any revenge but the revenge of enemies ; 

There is no poison greater than the poison of a serpent ; 

There is no wrath greater than the wrath of an enemy. ^ 

The Sayings of the Fathers gives the following choice 
specimens : 

There are four characters in those who sit under the wise : 

A sponge, a funnel, a strainer, and a sieve. 

A sponge, which sucks up all ; 

A funnel, which lets in here and lets out there ; 

A strainer, which lets out the wine and keeps back the dregs ; 

A bolt-sieve, which lets out the dust and keeps back the fine flour.* 

We add this specimen because it is similar to one of Jesus' 
soon to follow : 

Whosesoever wisdom is in excess of his works — to what is he like ? 

To a tree whose branches are abundant and its roots scanty ; 

And the wind comes and uproots it and overturns it. 

And whosesoever works are in excess of his wisdom — to what is he like ? 

To a tree whose branches are scanty and its roots abundant ; 

Though all the winds come upon it they stir it not from its place. ^ 

This has two antithetical pentameter triplets. 



VI. The Heptastich 

The heptastich is capable of a great variety of arrangements. 

The blessing of ISToah is a heptastich. It is comprised of two 
distichs and a tristich. 

Cursed be Canaan ; — 

A servant of servants shall he be to his brethren. 

1 Prov. 231-3- 19-21- 26-28 2411-12 2624-26 3015-16. 18-19. 21-23. 29-31. 32-33^ 

2 Prov. 2411-12. 3 Ecclus. 25i3-i5. 4 Pirqe Aboth 521. 
5 Pirqe Aboth 327. See p. 404. 



396 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Blessed be Yahweh, God of Shem, 
And let Canaan be their servant. 
May God spread out Japheth, 
And may He dwell in the tents of Shem, 
And let Canaan be their servant. i 

In the first distich we have an example of an unfinished line, a 
dimeter with the second line progressive to it. In the second dis- 
tich we have a simple progression in the thought. In the final 
tristich the progression runs on through the three lines. It is 
also worthy of note that the last line is in the three examples of 
the nature of a refrain. 

The heptastich is not common in Hebrew Wisdom. There are 
two examples in Proverbs. The first of these is the picture of the 
sluggard.^ The other is the following : 

Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye, 

Neither desire thou his dainties : 

Eor as he reckoneth within himself, so is he. 

Eat and drink, saith he to thee ; 

But his heart is not with thee. 

The morsel which thou hast eaten shalt thou vomit up. 

And lose thy sweet words. ^ 

A fine example of this type is found in the Sayings of the Jew- 
ish Fathers, a pentameter : 

Consider three things, and thou wilt not come into the hands of transgressors. 

Know whence thou comest and whither thou art going, 

And before whom thou art to give account and reckoning. 

Know whence thou comest : from a fetid drop ; 

And whither thou art going : to worm and maggot ; 

And before Whom thou art about to give account and reckoning, 

Before the King of the king of kings. Blessed be He.* 

A still more beautiful specimen is given by Jesus : 

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, 

Where moth and rust doth consume, 

And where thieves break through and steal : 

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, 

Where neither moth nor rust doth consume. 

And where thieves do not break through and steal : 

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.^ 

This heptastich is composed of two antithetical triplets of ex- 
hortation, with a concluding line giving the reason for the exhor- 
tation. 

1 Gen. 925-27. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy^ p. 30. 

2 Prov. 2430-82. See p. 418. * Pirqe Aboth, 31. 
s Prov. 236-8. 5 Mt. 6^9-21. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 397 

The triplets are antithetical, line for line, in a most impressive 
correspondence of language and thought. 

VII. The Octastich 

The octastich of eight lines is used thrice in Proverbs. ^ 

A favourite everywhere is the one of Agur : 

Two things have I asked of Thee, 

Deny me them not before I die : 

Remove far from me vanity and lies : 

Give me neither poverty nor riches ; 

Feed me with the food that is needful for me. 

Lest I be full and deny, and say, Who is Yahweh ? 

Or lest I be poor and steal. 

Or use profanely the name of my God.^ 

A fine specimen is in Ecclesiastes : 

He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it ; 

And whoso breaketh through a fence, a serpent shall bite him. 

Whoso heweth out stones shall be hurt therewith ; 

And he that cleaveth wood is endangered thereby. 

If iron be blunt, and one hath not whet the edge. 

He must put forth strength : and wisdom is profitable to direct. 

K the serpent bite before it is charmed. 

Then there is no profit in the charmer. ^ 

Ben Sirach also has some fine specimens. The following may 
be cited, because of its similarity to some sentences of Jesus : 

And stretch thine hand unto the poor, 

That thy blessing may be perfected. 

A gift hath grace in the sight of every man living, 

And from the dead detain it not. 

Fail not to be with them that weep, 

And mourn with them that mourn. 

Be not slow to visit the sick : 

For that shall make thee to be beloved.* 

VIII. The Decastich 

The decastich, a piece of ten lines, is used in Proverbs in the 
pentameter temperance poem ; ^ in the beautiful piece of recom- 
mendation of husbandry ; ^ also in a word of Agur, which is 
regarded as an early specimen of the sceptical tendencies which 
are so strong in Ecclesiastes," in the riddle of the four little 

1 Prov. 2322-25, 307-9, n-14. 4 EccIus. 732-35. 6 prov. 2723-27. 

2 Prov. 30'-9. 5 Prov. 2329-3^ ; see p. 418. ' Prov. 302-*. 

3 Eccles. 108-11. 



398 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

wise creatures,^ and in the ten-lined strophes of the Praise of 
Wisdom. 2 

A fine specimen is given in Tobit, as follows : 

Give alms of thy substance ; 

And when thou givest alms let not thine eye be grudging ; 

Neither turn thy face from any poor, 

And the face of God shall not be turned away from thee. 

If thou hast abundance, give alms accordingly ; 

If thou hast little, be not afraid to give according to the little : 

For thou layest up a good treasure for thyself against the day of necessity. 

Because alms delivereth from death ; 

And suffereth not to come into darkness : 

For alms is an offering for all that give it in the sight of the Most High.^ 

When we go beyond the decastich to the pieces of twelve 
lines or fourteen lines, we gain nothing additional to illustrate 
the principles of parallelism. 



IX. The Strophe 

The strophe is to the poem what the lines or verses are in 
relation to one another in the system of parallelism. Strophes 
are composed of a greater or lesser number of lines, sometimes 
equal, and sometimes unequal. Where there is a uniform flow 
of the emotion the strophes will be composed of the same num- 
ber of lines, and will be as regular in relation to one another as 
the lines of which they are composed ; but where the emotion is 
agitated by passion, or broken by figures of speech, or abrupt 
in transitions, they will be irregular and uneven. The strophes 
are subject to the same principles of parallelism as the lines 
themselves, and are thus either synonymous to one another, 
antithetical, or progressive, in those several varieties of paral- 
lelism already mentioned. A favourite arrangement is the bal- 
ancing of one strophe with another on the principle of the 
distich, then again of two with one as a tristich. Thus the 
song * of Moses has three parts, with four strophes in each part, 
arranged in double pairs of strophe and antistrophe, according 
to the scheme of 3x2x2. The song of Deborah ^ is composed 

1 Prov. 3024-28. See p. 418. 2 prov. 1-9. ^ xobit 47-ii. 

4 Deut. 32. 5 Jd. 5. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 399 

of three parts, with three strophes in each part, according to the 
scheme of 3x3. These divisions are determined by the prin- 
ciples of parallelism, not being indicated by any signs or marks 
in the Hebrew text. 

D. H. Miiller^ has recently called attention to the fact that 
there is what he names responsion, concatenation, and inclu- 
sion, in Hebrew as well as in Babylonian and Arabic strophical 
organization. He gives ample illustrations, for which he de- 
serves more credit than most scholars have been disposed to give 
him. He is entirely right in this matter, although there is 
nothing new in his theory but the terminology and some of the 
illustrations. 2 Responsion is simply the antithetical parallelism 
of strophes, concatenation is the stairlike parallelism of lines 
used in strophical relations, and inclusion is the introverted 
parallelism of strophes. 

Babylonian and Egyptian poetry have clearly marked stroph- 
ical organization. The hymn to Amen Ra, said to be of the 
fourteenth century B.C., in the golden age of Egyptian history 
and literature, is a fine specimen. The beginning of each verse 
is indicated by a red letter ; and each verse is also divided into 
short pauses by small red points. ^ 

This is the eighth strophe : 

Deliverer of the timid man from the violent ; 
Judging the poor, the poor and the oppressed ; 
Lord of Wisdom, whose precepts are wise ; 
At whose pleasure the Nile overflows ; 
Lord of Mercy, most loving ; 
At whose coming men live ; 
Opener of every eye ; 
Proceeding from the firmament ; 
Causer of pleasure and light ; 
At whose goodness the gods rejoice ; 
• Their hearts revive when they see him. 

This hymn has twenty strophes, the number of lines in each 
being as follows : 12, 14, 8, 7, 13, 8, 9, 11, 9, 15, 14, 9, 10, 5, 11, 
13, 10, 5, 10, 18. 

1 Die Fropheten in ihren ursprunglichen Form. Die Grundgesetze der ur- 
semitischen Foesie. 2 Bde., Wien, 1896. 

2 I have taught all these to my classes for years, and references to them will 
be found in my earlier writings. 

^ Becords of the Fast, IL pp. 129 seg. 



400 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Hymn to the Nile is remarkably regular, and it resem- 
bles in length, and in the number of its strophes and the lines 
that compose them, the song of Moses. ^ The Hymn to the Nile 
has the following fourteen strophes : 11, 8, 8, 10, 10, 8, 10, 11, 
12, 10, 9, 8, 14, 8. 2 

The development of the strophical system in ancient Egyp- 
tian poetry doubtless influenced Hebrew poetry. The Egyptian 
culture, combined with the inherited Shemitic culture, enabled 
the Hebrew poets to appropriate the artistic forms belonging 
to the poetry of the two great nations of the old world, and 
reproduce them under the influence of the Divine Spirit for 
the training of Israel in the holy religion. 

There is no intrinsic reason why the strophes of Hebrew 
poetry should be more regular than those of Egyptian poetry, 
but in fact the strophes of Hebrew poetry are ordinarily regu- 
lar in the number of the lines. 

1. Strophes of Two Lines 

Strophes of two lines are not common. Psalm 34 is an ex- 
ample of alphabetical trimeter couplets. 

Two of these will suffice as examples : 

K. I will bless Yahweh at every time, 

Continually His praise shall be in my mouth. 

S. In Yahweh my soul will make her boast ; 
The meek will hear and they will be glad. 

An example of an alphabetical hexameter couplet is found in 
Ps. 37. I shall take the strophes with b and D as illustrations, 
because these give examples where the caesura does not come in 
the middle of the line : 

h. The wicked borroweth and payeth not — but the righteous dealeth gra- 
ciously and giveth. 
For they that be blessed of Him inherit the land — but they that be cursed 
of Him shall be cut off. 
a. Of Yahweh are a man's goings established — but He delighteth in His way : 
Though he fall he shall not be utterly cast down — for Yahweh upholdeth 
with His hand. 3 

1 Deut. 32. 2 Jiecords of the Past, New Series, III. pp. 46 seq. 

3 Ps. 3721-24. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 401 

2. Strophes of Three Lines 

The triplet is more frequently used in strophes. 

An example has been given in the alphabetical dirge of Lam. 3.^ 
Another specimen may be found in the Wisdom of Jesus already 
given.^ This additional one will sufB.ce. 

Be not ye called Rabbi : 
Eor One is your Rabbi ; 
And all ye are brethren. 

Call ye no one Father : ^ 
For One is your Father, 
He which is in heaven. 

Be not ye called Master : 

For One is your Master ; ^ 

The greatest among you is your servant. — * 

This beautiful piece of Wisdom is of great artistic beauty. In 
the Hebrew original ^ each line was a trimeter measured by three 
beats of the accent. The lines are organized in three strophes of 
three lines each. The number three determines its artistic struct- 
ure, and it is, accordingly, the cube of three j three strophes of 
three lines of three accents. 

3. Strophes of Four Lines 

The tetrastich as a double couplet is very frequent in 
strophes. 

Psalm 3 is a good specimen of the quartette trimeter. 

1. Yahweh, how are mine adversaries increased ! 
Many are rising up against me ; 

Many are saying of my soul, 

There is no salvation for him in God. 

2. But Thou 6 art a shield about me ; 

My glory and the lifter up of mine head. 
With my voice unto Yahweh I was crying, 
And He answered me from His holy hill. 

3. As for me I laid me down and slept ; 

I awaked ; for Yahweh was sustaining me. 

1 See p. 382. 2 See pp. 388, 389. 

'^ "On the earth" and '• Messiah" are explanatory additions, which destroy 
the measure. * Mt. 238-12. 

5 In translating into an unknown original, we cannot be sure of the exact 
words that were used, but we may come sufficiently near for our present 
purpose. s mrf makes line too long. 

2d 



402 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

I will not be afraid of myriads of the people, 
That have set themselves against me round about. 

4. O Arise,! Save me, my God ! 

Eor Thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone ; 
Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked • 
Salvation belongs to Yahweh.^ 

4. /Sti'Ojohes of Five Lines 

The author of the book of Samuel gives us ^ a little piece of 
poetry of the didactic type that he calls : " The Last Words of 
David." This lyric is composed of four strophes of five trim- 
eter lines each.* 

1. Utterance of the man whom the Most High raised up ; 
The spirit of Yahweh speaks in me. 

And his word is upon my tongue ; 
The God of Israel doth say to me, 
The Rock of Israel doth speak. 

2. A ruler over men — righteous ; 
A ruler in the fear of God. 

Yea, he is like the morning light when the sun rises, 

A morning without clouds. 

From shining, from rain, tender grass sprouts from the earth. 

3. Is not thus my house with God ? 

For an everlasting covenant hath He made with me, 
Arranged in all things, and secured ; 
Yea, all my salvation and every delight 
"Will He not cause it to sprout ? 

4. But the worthless, like thorns all of them are thrust away, 
For they cannot be taken with the hand. 

The man touching them, 

Must be armed with iron, and the spear's staff; 

And with fire they will be utterly consumed. 

Psalm 67 has three trimeter pentastichs. 

1. May God be gracious to us and bless us ; 
Let His face shine toward us, 

1 " Yahweh " is inserted in the Hebrew text without need. 

2 The last clause, which I have omitted, is a liturgical addition. 

3 2 Sam. 231-7. 

* The lyric is introduced with these words : " David, the son of Jesse, saith.'* 
Two explanatory statements are inserted : "The anointed of the God of Jacob " 
and "Sweet in the songs of Israel" ; which call attention to the fact that the X 

supposed author was king of Israel by divine appointment and that he was a ^ 

sweet singer, renowned for lyric composition. These statements have no place 
in the poem as such. 



THE PAKALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 403 

And give to us peace ; i 

That Thy way may be known in the earth ; 

Among all nations Thy salvation. 

2. Let the people praise Thee, O God ; 
Let the people praise Thee, all of them ; 
Let the nations be glad and sing for joy ; 
For Thou wilt judge the peoples with equity, 
And the nations Thou wilt lead in the earth. 

3. Let the people praise Thee, God, 
Let the people praise Thee, all of them ; 
The land hath given her increase ; 
And Yahweh, our God, will bless us,^ 
And all the ends of the earth will fear him. 

5. Strophes of Six Lines 

The six-lined strophe may be illustrated by the tetrameter, 
Ps. 46, which also has a refrain. 

1. God is ours, a refuge and strength, 

A help in troubles ready to be found ; 

Therefore we shall not fear though the earth change. 

And though mountains be moved into the heart of the seas ; 

Its waters roar, — be troubled. 

Mountains shake with the swelling thereof. 

Yahweh Sahaoth is with us ;^ 

The God of Jacob is our refuge. 

2. A river (there is) whose streams make glad the city of God, 
The holy place of the tabernacles of Elyon. 

God is in her midst ; she cannot be moved ; 
God will help her at the turn of the morn. 
Nations raged — kingdoms were moved ; 
Has He uttered His voice, the earth melteth. 
Yahweh Sahaoth is with us ; 
The God of Jacob is our refuge. 

3. Come, behold the doings of Yahweh, 
What wonders He hath done in the earth. 

He is causing wars to cease unto the ends of the earth ; 
The bow He breaketh, and cutteth the spear in sunder. * 

1 It is improbable that the high-priest's blessing (Nu. 624-26) would be mu- 
tilated, especially as the third line is needed to make up the five lines of the 
strophe. I do not hesitate, therefore, to restore it. 

2 The words D^'^b^ 1331^'' are repeated in the Hebrew text by dittography. 
They destroy the measure. I have therefore elided them. The original Yahweh 
I have used instead of the later Elohim. 

3 The refrain at the close of this strophe has been omitted as occasionally 
elsewhere in Hebrew poetry, and it should be restored. 

4 The destruction of the instruments of war is as in Hos. 220, ig^ 94^ ^e 
regard the clause '^K3 s^'ltT'' mb-IU as a later marginal addition that has crept 



404 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Be still and know that I am God : 

I shall be exalted among the nations, I shall be exalted in the earth. 

Yahiveh Sabaoth is ivith us ; 

The God of Jacob is our refuge. 

Jesus gives us two fine specimens of this type. The first has ^ 
two antithetical hexastichs in the tetrameter movement, in which 
each line of the second strophe is in parallelism with its fellow 
in the first strophe : 

1. Every one which heareth ^ these words of mine and doeth them, 
Shall be likened unto a wise man, 

Which built his house upon the rock : 
And the rain descended, and the floods came. 
And the winds blew, and beat upon that house ; 
And it fell not : for it was fomided upon the rock. 

2. But every one which heareth these words of mine and doeth them not, 
Shall be likened unto a foolish man, 

Which built his house upon the sand : 
And the rain descended, and the floods came, 
And the winds blew, and smote upon that house ; 
And it fell : and great was the fall thereof. 

This certainly is finer than any specimen of the hexastich in the 
whole range of the literature of Wisdom. The gospel of Mat- 
thew has preserved this piece in its original form, but Luke ^ has 
condensed it and made it into a prose parable. 

We shall now consider a longer piece, where the gospel has 
condensed the concluding strophe, and at times, also, by minor 
changes, mars the beauty of the other strophes. But the piece is 
so symmetrical that it is quite easy to see its original structure. 
This splendid piece of the Wisdom of Jesus describes His royal 
judgment.^ It is unsurpassed for simplicity, grandeur, pathos, 
antithesis, and graphic realism. It is composed of five pentameter 
strophes of six lines each. The first strophe is introductory, 
describing the King taking His seat on His judgment throne, sur- 
rounded by angels, the assembly of all nations before Him, and 
His separating them as a shepherd divides his sheep from his 
goats. The judgment itself is presented in four strophes, a pair 
for the righteous and a pair for the wicked, each pair composed 
of a strophe and an antistrophe, and the second pair being in 
such thorough-going antithetical parallelism to the first pair that 

into the text. It is trimeter in the midst of tetrameters, and makes the strophe 
one line too long. i Mt. 724-27. 

2 Tras 6(TTLs dKovcL (v. 24) and iras 6 (xkovuv (v. 26) go back to the same 
original, 17tttrn h'D. odv is a connective that was inserted by the evangelist to 
adapt this sentence of Wisdom to its context. 

3 Lk. 6*7-49. 4 Mt. 2531-40. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 405 

every line in the one is in antithesis to every line of the other. 
The whole concludes with a couplet summing up the everlasting 
penalty : 

1. When the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all the angels with Him, 
Then shall He sit on the throne of His glory : 

And before Him will be gathered all the nations : 

And he shall separate them one from another, 

As the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats : 

And He shall set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 

2. Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand. 
Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom, i 
Which was prepared for you from the foundation of the world : 

For I was an hungered, and ye gave Me meat : I was thirsty, and ye gave 

Me drink : 
I was a stranger, and ye took Me in : naked, and ye clothed Me : 
I was sick, and ye visited Me : I was in prison, and ye came unto Me. 

3. Then shall the righteous answer him,^ Lord, 

When saw we Thee an hungered and fed Thee, or athirst and gave Thee 

drink ? 
When 3 saw we Thee a stranger, and took Thee in ? or naked, and clothed 

Thee? 
When 3 saw we Thee sick, and visited Thee ? * or in prison, and came unto 

Thee? 
And the King shall answer and say unto them. Verily I say unto you, 
Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these least of My brethren, ye did it unto 

Me. 

4. Then shall the King ^ say also unto them on the left hand, 
Depart from Me, ye cursed, into Gehenna,^ 

Which is prepared for the devil and his angels : 

For I was an hungered, and ye gave Me no meat : I was thirsty, and ye gave 

me no drink : 
I was a stranger, and ye took Me not in : naked, and ye clothed Me not ; 
I was sick, and ye visited Me not : I was in prison, and ye came not unto 

Me. 7 

1 The Greek combines lines 2 and 3 into one prose sentence, rrjv TjTOLixaa-fxivqv 
ifuv paa-iXdav, but the Hebrew, as Delitzsch gives it, is WDh .1331^.1 m^btt.l, so 
that the third line begins with the participial clause (cf. strophe 4, line 3). 

2 \4yovTes is a prosaic insertion, Hebrew poets usually omit ^^nh, leaving it 
to be understood (cf. Ps. 2^). ^ g^ ig an insertion of the Greek translation. 

4 This clause is verified by the parallel in 2, line 6 ; it was left out in the 
prose translation. 

5 The parallelism of 2, line 1, requires "King." The Greek has reduced it 
to the mere subject implied in epe?. 

6 There is a tendency in the Gospels to explain the Hebrew Gehenna to Gen- 
tile readers. I think that Gehenna was in the original in antithesis with 
"kingdom," and that "eternal fire" is an explanatory substitution (see The 
Expository Times, June, 1897, p. 397). See also Chap. IV. p. 90. 

■^ This line has been reduced as strophe 3, line 4. There the verb "visited 
thee " was left out, here the verb " came unto me." 



406 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

5. Then shall the wicked i answer him, Lord, 

When saw we Thee an hungered (and did not give Thee meat 2), or athirst 

(and gave Thee not to drink) ; 
(When saw we Thee) a stranger (and took Thee not in), or naked (and 

clothed Thee not) ; 
(When saw we Thee) sick (and did not visit Thee), or in prison (and did not 

come unto Thee). 
Then shall He answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, 
Liasmuch as ye did it not unto one of the least of these, ye did it not unto 

Me. 

The following couplet was probably added by tbe evangelist : 

And these shall go away into eternal punishment ; 
But the righteous into eternal life. 

6. Strophes of Seven Lines 

The seven-lined strophe may be illustrated by the four pen- 
tameter strophes of Ps. 118. 

1. Give thanks to Yahweh ; for He is good — for His mercy is for ever ; 
Let Israel now say — that His mercy is for ever ; 

Let the house of Aaron now say — that His mercy is for ever ; 
Let them now that fear Yahweh say — that His mercy is for ever. 
Out of my distress I called upon Yah — He answered me in a large place. 
Yahweh is mine ; I will not fear : — what can man do unto me ? 
Yahweh is mine, as among them that help me — I will see my desire in my 
enemies, 

2. Better to seek refuge in Yahweh — than to trust in man. 
Better to seek refuge in Yahweh — than to trust in nobles. 

•All nations do compass me about — it is in the name of Yahweh that I wiU 

destroy them. 
They do compass me about ; yea, they do compass me all about — it is in the 

name of Yahweh that I will destroy them : 
They do compass me about as bees — they will surely be quenched as the fire 

of thorns.^ 
They did thrust sore at me that I might f aU — but Yahweh helped me ; 
My help and my song is Yah — and He is become mine for victory. 

3. The voice of rejoicing and victory — is in the tents of the righteous : * 

The right hand of Yahweh is exalted — the right hand of Yahweh is doing 
valiantly. 

1 The antithesis requires the "wicked" over against the "righteous," and 
not simply the subject of the verb. The measure of the line also demands it. 

2 In this strophe the clauses were all condensed in the Greek prose transla- 
tion by omission of all the verbs, and the summing of them up in "minister 
unto thee." They should all be restored. 

s The third "It is in the name of Yahweh that I will destroy them," is 
dittography. I elide it therefore. 

* "The right hand of Yahweh is doing valiantly," is a dittograph from the 
line below. I elide it therefore. 



THE PAKALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 407 

I shall not die but I shall live — and I will declare the works of Yah. 

Yah hath chastened me sore — but to death he did not give me. 

Open for me the gates of righteousness — that I may enter into them to give 

thanks to Yah. 
Yonder gate is Yahweh's — the righteous may enter therein. 
I will give thanks to Thee, for Thou hast answered me — and art become mine 

for victory. 

The stone the builders rejected — is become the head of the corner. 

From Yahweh is this — it is marvellous in our eyes. 

This very day Yahweh hath made — let us rejoice and let us be glad in it. 

now Yahweh give victory — O now Yahweh send prosperity. 

Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Yahweh — we bless you from the 

house of Yahweh. 
Yahweh is God and He hath let shine His face for us i even unto the horns 

of the altar. 
My God art Thou, and I will give thanks unto Thee — my God I will exalt 

Thee.2 

A choice pentameter of seven-lined strophes is the prophecy 
(Is. 14). The following strophes will be sufficient to illustrate : 

How art thou fallen from heaven — day star, son of the morning ! 
How art thou cut down to earth — thou who didst lay low the nations ! 
Thou, indeed, who saidst in thine heart — I will ascend unto heaven, 
Above the stars of God — I will lift up my throne. 

And will sit in the mount of congregation — on the remote parts of the 
north : 

1 will ascend above the heights of cloud — I will be like to 'Elyon. 
Yet unto Sheol thou art brought down — to the sides of the pit. 

They that look upon thee, narrowly look upon thee — upon thee consider ; 
Is this the man that made the earth tremble — shook kingdoms ; 
Made the habitable world as a wilderness — and its cities overthrew ; 
His prisoners did not loose to their homes — all (of them) kings of nations ? 
All of them lay down in honour — each in his own house : 
But thou art cast forth as an abhorred vulture ^ — clothed with the slain, 
Among those pierced with the sword, descending to the stones of the Pit * — 
thou art like a carcass trodden under f oot.^ 



7. Strophes of Mglit Lines 

The strophe of eight lines is more frequent. 
Psalm 8 is a beautiful example of a hymn in two strophes of 
eight lines each, with a refrain, having the peculiarity that the 

1 The clause omitted is a gloss from the margin. It was a liturgical direction 
with regard to the thank offering accompanying this Te Deum for victory. 

2 The psalm closes with a final liturgical line : " Give thanks to Yahweh ; for 
He is good — for His mercy is for ever." 

3 Read "1ii?5, vulture^ for 12£3, hraiich, and strike out T^Sp^ as a gloss. 
* This, according to usage, is the Pit of Sheol. ^ ig. 1412-19. 



408 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

refrain begins the first strophe and closes the second, thus 
ending the psalm : 

1. Yahweli, our Lord, 

How excellent is Thy name in all the earth ! 
Thou whose glory doth extend over the heavens, 
Out of the mouth of little children and sucklings 
Thou dost establish strength because of Thine adversaries, 
To silence enemy and avenger. 
When I see Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, 
Moon and stars which Thou hast prepared ; 
What is frail man, that Thou shouldst be mindful of him ? 
Or the son of man, that Thou visitest him ? 

2. When thou didst make him a little lower than divine beings, 
With glory and honour crowning him, 

Thou mad'st him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands ; 

All things Thou didst put under his feet : 

Sheep and oxen, all of them ; 

And also beasts of the field ; 

Birds of heaven, and fishes of the sea ; 

Those that pass through the paths of the sea. 

Yahweh, our Lord, 

How excellent is Thy name in all the earth ! 

Jesus gives a strikingly beautiful specimen of the octastich ^ in 
three tetrameter strophes, with an introductory couplet. These 
strophes are in synonymous parallelism, line for line, throughout 
the eight lines of the three strophes. There are a few places 
where the gospel has marred the original line by the Greek trans- 
lation, by words of explanation, or by condensation. But the 
piece is so symmetrical that it is difficult to miss the original. 

Take heed that ye do not your righteousness before men,^ 
Else ye have no reward with your Father. ^ 

This is the introductory couplet. Three kinds of righteousness 
are now taken up : almsgiving, prayer, and fasting. Between the 
prayer and the fasting, Matthew, as often in the Sermon on the 
Mount, has inserted other material relating to prayer; namely, 
the Lord's Prayer, which is given by Luke in a more appropriate 
historical place, and a tetrastich as to forgiveness.* The three 
strophes are as follows : 

1 Mt. 61-6- 16-18, 

2 The Greek adds the explanatory 7rp6s rb deadijpai avToh^ which makes the 
line too long, and is tautological. 

3 Matthew as usual adds t^j ev rots ovpavois. 

* See The Expository Times, July, 1897, p. 453. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 409 

1. Wheni thou doest alms, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites i^ 

Tor they sound a trumpet before them in the synagogues and in the streets, 

That they may have glory of men. 

Verily I say unto you, They have received their reward. 

But thou,3 when thou doest alms, 

Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth : 

That thine alms may be in secret ; 

And thy Father which seeth in secret shall recompense thee. 

2. When 4 thou prayest,^ thou shalt not be as the hypocrites : 
For they love to stand ^ in the synagogues and on ''' the streets, 
That they may be seen of men to pray. 

Verily I say unto you. They have received their reward. 

But thou, when thou pray est, 

Enter into thine inner chamber and close ^ the door : 

And pray to thy Father which is in secret ; 

And thy Father which seeth in secret shall recompense thee. 

3. When thou fastest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites : 

They^ are of sad countenance, because they disfigure their faces, 

That they may be seen of men to fast. 

Verily I say unto you. They have received their reward. 

But thou, when thou fastest. 

Anoint thy head and wash thy face : lo 

That thou mayest be seen of thy Father which is in secret ; 

And thy Father which seeth in secret shall recompense thee. 

The threefold reiteration in these parallel lines as to the three 
classes of righteous conduct is exceedingly powerful. 

1 o5v has been inserted as a connective. 

2 Comparison with the other strophes makes it evident that there has been 
a transposition here, which has destroyed the measure of the two lines, and 
made them into one prose sentence. It is easy to restore the original. 

3 "Thou " should be inserted, as in the other two strophes. 
^ Kal is a Greek insertion. 

5 There is a variation in the Greek between the second singular and second 
plural, which is due to the inexactness of the translator. I do not hesitate to 
restore the second singular, which was evidently original throughout. 

6 "Pray" has been transposed in Greek from the next line. The parallel 
lines and other strophes show that it belongs there. 

■^ " Corners " has been inserted to make it more specific, 

8 The Greek connects this clause with the following sentence because of its 
idiomatic use of the participle for the Hebrew verb. 

^ The Greek attaches a-Kvdpojiroi to the "hypocrites," but the parallel lines 
show that there should be a statement respecting them at the beginning of the 
second line. 

1° tx-f} Tois dvdpdjirois — dXXd are insertions to make the statement more em- 
phatic, but they destroy the measure of the line and the parallelism with the 
other strophes. 



410 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

8. Strophes of Nine Lines 
Psalms 42, 43, give strophes of nine lines with refrains : 

1. As a hart whicli crieth out after the water brooks, 
So my soul crieth out for Thee, God ! 

My soul doth thirst for God, for the God of life : 

How long ere I shall come to appear before the face of God ? 

My tears have been to me food day and night ; 

While they say unto me all day. Where is thy God ? 

These things would I remember, and would pour out my soul within me : 

How I used to pass along in the throng, used to lead them up to the house of 

God, 
With the sound of rejoicing and praise, a multitude keeping festival. 

Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moaning 
within me ? 

Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him, 

The deliverance of my face, and my God. 

2. Therefore would I remember Thee from the land of Jordan, and the Harmons, 

from the mount Mizar. 
Deep unto deep is calling to the sound of- Thy cataracts ; 
All Thy breakers and Thy billows do pass over me : 
By day Yahweh will appoint His mercy, 

And by night His song will be with me, prayer to the God of my life. 
I must say to the God of my rock. Why dost Thou forget me ? 
Why go I mourning because of the oppression of an enemy ? 
As a breaking in my bones my adversaries do reproach me ; 
While they say unto me all day, Where is thy God ? 

Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moaning 
within me ? 

Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him, 

The deliverance of my face, and my God. 

3. Judge me, God, and plead my cause against an unmerciful nation ; 
Against a man of deceit and wickedness, deliver me. 

O Thou God, my fortress, why dost Thou cast me off ? 

Why must I go about mourning because of the oppression of an enemy ? 

Send Thy light and Thy truth : let them lead me ; 

Let them bring me unto Thy holy mount, even to Thy dwellings : 

That I may come to the altar of God, 

To the God of the joy of my rejoicing, 

That I may praise Thee with harp, O God, my God. 

Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moaning 
within me ? 

Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him, 

The deliverance of my face, and my God. 

The strophes have each nine lines, the refrain three lines. I 
am well aware that other arrangements of the lines are nsnal, and 
that objection may be taken to my elimination of v. 7 a ; but it 
seems clearly established that a copyist's mistake has caused the 



THE PAEALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 411 

refrain of the first strophe to be deprived of its closing word, 
which begins this verse ; and the other three words are easiest to 
explain as copyist's mistakes, also repeated from the refrain. 

9. Strophes of Ten Lines 

Strophes of ten lines are frequent. The Psalm of Creation ^ 
has eight trimeter strophes of ten lines each. 

Two strophes will suffice to illustrate : 

1. Bless, my soul, Yahweh. 
My God 2 Thou art very great ; 

With grandeur and glory Thou art clothed ; 
Covering Thyself with light as a garment, 
Stretching out heaven as a curtain ; 
He v^ho layeth in the waters His chambers, 
He who maketh the clouds His chariot. 
He who walketh on the wings of the wind ; 
Making winds His messengers, 
His ministers flaming fire. 

2. He laid the earth on its foundations : 
It cannot be moved for ever and ever. 

With the deep as a vesture Thou didst cover it. 

Above the mountains waters were standing ; 

At Thy rebuke they flee, 

At the sound of Thy thunder they haste away ; 

They flow over the mountains, they descend into the valleys, 

Unto the place that Thou didst lay for them, 

The bound Thou didst set that they might not pass over : 

They may not return to cover the earth. 

10. Strophes of Twelve Lines 

The strophe of twelve lines may be illustrated by the beauti- 
ful piece of Wisdom (Prov. 9) : 

1. Wisdom hath builded her house, 
She hath hewn out her seven pillars : 
She hath killed her beasts ; she hath mingled her wine ; 
She hath furnished her table. 
She hath sent forth her maidens to cry 
Upon the high places of the city : 
Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither ; 
As for him that is void of understanding, she saith to him : 
Come, eat of my bread, 

1 Ps. 104. 

2 The Massoretic mn'' has been inserted from dittography. It makes the 
trimeter into a tetrameter without reason. 



412 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

And drink of the wine whicli I have mingled. 
Leave off, ye simple ones, and live ; 
And walk in the way of understanding. 

2. The woman Folly is clamorous ; 
Simplicity, — she knoweth nothing. 
And she sitteth at the door of her house, 
On a seat in the high places of the city, 
To call to them that pass by, 
Who go right on their way : 
Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither ; 

And as for him that is void of understanding, she saith to him, 
Stolen waters are sweet. 
And bread eaten in secret is pleasant. 
But he knoweth not that the Shades are there, 
That her guests are in the depths of Sheol. 

11. Strophes of Fourteen Lines 

The strophe of fourteen lines is frequent in Hebrew poetry. 
Psalm 18 = 2 Sam. 22 is a good example. 

Two strophes will suffice to show it : 

1. I love Thee, Yahweh, my strength. 

My 1 rock and my fortress and my deliverer ; 

My God, my strong rock in whom I seek refuge ; 

My shield, and horn of my salvation, my high tower, 

(I said) I will call upon Yahweh, who is worthy to be praised : 

So shall I be saved from mine enemies. 

The breakers ^ of death compassed me, 

And the floods of Belial terrified me, 

The cords of Sheol compassed me. 

The snares of Death came upon me ; 

In my distress I call upon Yahweh, 

And cry unto my God ; 

He hears my voice out of His temple, 

And my cry ^ comes unto His ears. 

2. Then the earth shook and trembled. 

And the foundations of the mountains moved, 
And were shaken, because He was wroth. 
There went up a smoke in His nostrils, 
And fire out of His mouth devoured : 
Coals were kindled by it. 
And He bowed the heavens and came down. 
Thick darkness under His feet, 

1 TW^'' of Hebrew text should be elided. It is an assimilation to 2 Sam. 22, 
which omits previous line. 

2 ■'bin of Hebrew text is dittography from next line. The reading of 
2 Sam. 22 is correct. See p. 91. 

3 vjsb is not in 2 Sam. 22. It makes the line too long, and should be elided. 



THE PARALLELISMS OF HEBREW POETRY 413 

And rode upon the cherub and flew : 

Yea, flew swiftly upon the wings of the wind. 

He made darkness i round about Him His pavilion, 

Darkness of waters, thick clouds of the skies, 

From the brightness before Him, 2 they passed, 

Hailstones and coals of fire. 

12. Unequal Strophes 

The strophes are not always of an equal number of lines. 
Often there is an intentional variation of their number. One 
of the earliest odes ^ is composed of three strophes, gradually 
diminishing, in accordance with its dirgelike character, in 
6x5x4 lines. The ode is abrupt in style, rapid in transitions, 
full of rare forms and expressions, with frequent alliterations, 
and of real beauty : 

Come to Heshbon ! 

Built, yea established be the city of Sihon ; 

For fire went forth from Heshbon, 

Flame from the city of Sihon. 

It consumed Ar of Moab, 

The lords of the high places of Arnon. 

Woe to thee, Moab ! 
Thou art lost, people of Chemosh ! 
He hath given over his sons unto flight. 
And his daughters unto captivity, 
Unto the king of the Amorites, Sihon ! 

Then we shot at them — He was lost — 
Heshbon unto Dibon — 
And we wasted them even unto Nophah, 
With fire unto Medeba. 

The refrain is frequently used in Hebrew poetry. We have 
had a number of examples where it begins or closes strophes of 
equal length.* But the refrain does not always divide the 
poem into equal strophes. Thus the dirge of Saul^ is com- 
posed of three parts, which melt away according to the scheme 
of 18, 5, 1. The refrain itself does not always correspond 
throughout. Thus in Ps. 80 it increases itself for emphasis in 
the heaping up of the divine names in the successive strophes ; 

1 l^riD of Hebrew text is an explanatory insertion. 

2 VSU of Hebrew text is from dittography. 

3 Nu. 2127-30. 4 See pp. 403, 406, 410. ^ 2 Sam. 119-27. 



414 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the third and fourth strophes constitute a double strophe, giv- 
ing the allegory of the vine with a double refrain at the close, 
massing together a series of imperatives. Psalm 45 gives a 
varying refrain and three gradually increasing parts. The 
refrain is also used for the division of larger pieces of poetry, 
as in the Song of Songs, where it divides the poem into five 
acts ; and in the great Book of Comfort of the second Isaiah, 
where the two earlier editions, as well as the final division, are 
all marked by refrains.^ In all these cases the strophes and 
the divisions of the poems are of unequal lengths. The strophes 
of the book of Job and of the Prophets are also usually unequal.^ 

1 See Briggs, Messianic Fro^hecy, 7th ed., pp. 141 seq., 229 seq., 338 seq. 

2 See pp. 422-425. 



CHAPTER XVII 

THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 

Hebrew poetry may be divided into three general classes, 

— Lyric, Gnomic, and Composite. 

I. Lyric Poetry 

Lyric poetry is the earliest development of literature. We 
find it scattered through the various historical and prophetical 
books, and also in the great collection of Hebrew lyric poetry, 
the Psalter. The three pieces ascribed by tradition to Moses ^ 
subdivide lyric poetry into the hymn, the prayer, and the song. 
The hymn is found in rich variety, — the evening hymn, the 
morning hymn, the hymn in a storm, hymns of victory or odes, 
the thanksgiving hymn. The Korahite Psalter is composed 
chiefly of hymns ; so also the most of the fourth and fifth books 
of the Psalter, including the greater and lesser hallels, the hal- 
lelujahs, and doxologies. The prayers are in great abundance, 

— evening and morning prayers, a litany before a battle, prayers 
for personal and national deliverance, psalms of lamentation, 
penitence, religious meditation, of faith and assurance, — in all 
the rich variety of devotion. These are most numerous in the 
psalms ascribed to David, and may be regarded as especially 
the type of the Davidic Psalter, the earliest prayer-book of 
Israel. A special form of this class is the dirge, represented 
in the laments of David over Saul and Jonathan, and over 
Abner, and in the very elaborate and artistic book of Lamenta- 
tions, and not infrequently in the Prophets. The songs are 
abundant, and in every variety of historical description, pict- 
ures of nature, didactic exhortation and advice, social and 
other poems. In the Psalter there are songs of exhortation, 

1 Ex. 15 ; Ps. 90 ; Deut. 32. 
415 



416 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

warning, encouragement, historical recollection, prophetic an- 
ticipation, and the love song. The psalms of Asaph are chiefly 
of this class of poems. 

II. Gnomic Poetry 

Gnomic poetry has but few specimens in the historical books. 
There has been preserved a riddle of the ancient hero Samson : 

Erom the eater came forth food, 

And from the strong came forth sweetness. 

This is followed by a satire : 

If you had not ploughed with my heifer, 
You would not have found out my riddle. i 

Another witty saying of this hero is preserved : 

With the jawbone of an ass a heap two heaps ; 

With the jawbone of an ass have I smitten a thousand men.^ 

The fable of Jotham ^ is the finest specimen of this gnomic 
poetry to be found in Hebrew apart from the Wisdom Litera- 
ture. 

The trees went forth on a time 

To anoint a king over them. 

1. And they said unto the olive tree : 
Come thou, and reign over us. 
But the olive tree said unto them : 
Shall I leave my fatness, 
Wherewith they honour God and men. 
And go to sway over the trees ? 

2. And the trees said to the fig tree : 
Come thou, and reign over us. 
But the fig tree said unto them : 
Shall I leave my sweetness. 

And also my good fruit, 

And go to sway over the trees ? 

3. And the trees said unto the vine : M 
Come thou, and reign over us. 

And the vine said unto them : 

Shall I leave my wine, 

Which cheereth God and man, ' 

And go to sway over the trees ? 

4. And ^ the trees said unto the bramble : 
Come thou, and reign over us. 

1 Jd. 1414- 18. 2 Jcl. 1516. 3 Jd. 98-15. 

4 The Hebrew 73 = all seems an unnecessary insertion. 



THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 417 

But the bramble said unto the trees : i 
Come, seek refuge in my shadow : 
1 And fire will come out of the bramble, 
To devour the cedars of Lebanon. 

The Hebrews were fond of this species of poetry, but we 
could hardly expect to find much of it in the Bible. ^ Its re- 
ligious and ethical forms are preserved in a rich collection in 
the Proverbs, consisting of fables, parables, proverbs, riddles, 
moral and political maxims, satires, philosophical and specula- 
tive sentences. There are several hundred distinct couplets, 
— synonymous, antithetical, parabolical, comparative, emble- 
matical, — besides fifty larger pieces of three, four, five, six, 
seven, and eight lines, with a few poems, such as the temper- 
ance poem,3 the pastoral,* the pieces ascribed to the poets 
Aluqah, Agur, and Lemuel, the alphabetical praise of the tal- 
ented wife,^ and the great admonition of Wisdom in fifteen 
advancing discourses.^ 

A few specimens of this kind of poetry will suffice to illus- 
trate it. 

There are several riddles ascribed to Aluqah.'' 

(1) The riddle of the insatiable things : '' 

Two daughters (cry) : give ! give ! 
Three are they which cannot be satisfied ; 
Four say not, Enough. 

The answer : 

Sheol, and a barren womb ; 

Land cannot be satisfied with water ; 

And fire says not : Enough. 

(2) The riddle of the little wise people.^ 

Four are little ones of earth ; 
But they are wise exceedingly. 
The answer : 

The ants are a people not strong, 

But they prepare in summer their food ; 

1 The Hebrew text inserts the conditional clause "if in truth ye anoint me 
king over you," which is a prose sentence, and "if not," as an explanation: 
but it destroys the measure. 

2 See Wunsche, Die Bdthselweisheit bei d. Hehrdern, Leipzig, 1883. 
^ Prov. 2.329-35. 6 prov. 1-9. 

4 Prov. 2722-27. 7 Prov. 30i5-i6, 

5 Prov. 3110-31 ; see p. 383, where it is given. s Prov. 3024-28. 

2e 



418 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Conies are a people not mighty, 

But they make in the rock their home ; 

A king the locusts have not, 

But they march forth in bands — all of them ; 

The spider with the hands thou mayest catch, 

But she dwells in the palaces of kings. 

There is also a beautiful temperance poem ^ composed of ten 
pentameter lines. 

Who hath woe ? who hath wretchedness ? who hath stripes ? who hath 

murmuring ? 
Who hath wounds without cause ? who hath dark flashing eyes ? 
Those tarrying long at the wine : those going to seek spiced wine. 
Look not on wine when it sparkleth red ; 
When it giveth in the cup its glance ; floweth smoothly : 
Its end is that as a serpent it biteth, and like an adder it stingeth. 
Thine eyes will see strange things, and thine heart utter perverse things ; 
So that thou wilt become like one lying down in the heart of the sea ; and 

like one lying down on the top of a mast. 
They have smitten me (thou wilt say), but I am not hurt : they have 

wounded me, I feel it not : 
How long ere I shall arise that I may seek it yet again ? 

Another choice piece is the poem of the sluggard ^ of seven 
trimeters. 

By the field of a slothful man I passed, 

And by the vineyard of a man without understanding ; 

And lo, its wall was overgrown with thorns, 

Its face covered over with nettles. 

And its wall of stones was broken down ; 

So that I gazed to give it attention : 

I saw — I received instruction. 

This is followed by a tetrastich trimeter, which is quoted from 
the Praise of Wisdom.^ 

A little sleep, a little of slumber, 

A little folding of the hands to lie down ; 

And thy poverty comes walking on, 

And thy want as a man armed with a shield. 



III. Composite Poetry 

Composite poetry starts in part from a lyric base, as in 
prophecy, beginning with the blessings of Jacob and Moses, 
and the poems of Balaam, and continuing in lesser and greater 
pieces in the prophetical writings, the Song of Songs, and 

1 Prov. 2329-35. 2 prov. 243o-«*. s prov. 6io. 



THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 



419 



Lamentations ; in part from a gnomic base as in the book of 
Job and Ecclesiastes. 

IV. Dramatic Poetry 

The dramatic element is quite strong in Hebrew poetry. A 
few examples will suffice. 

1. I shall give the first from the Psalter ; 
r Lift up your heads, O ye gates 



Chorus. 



Inquiry. 



Chorus. 

Inquiry. 
Besponse. 



-{ Yea, lift yourselves, ye everlasting doors ; 
I That the King of Glory may come in. 

Who, then, is the King of Glory ? 
( Yahweh, strong and mighty, 
I Yahweh, mighty in battle. 
r Lift up your heads, ye gates ; 
<j Yea, lift them, ye everlasting doors ; 
I That the King of Glory may come in. 

Who is he, the King of Glory ? 
( Yahweh Sabaoth, 
< He is the King of Glory .i 



2. The prophet Hosea gives a good example : 

Prophet. return, Israel, 

Unto Yahweh thy God ; 

Eor thou hast stumbled by thy iniquity. 

Take with you words, 

And return unto Yahweh ; 

Say unto Him everything. 
Ephraim. Eorgive iniquity and accept good things ; 

And we will render the fruit of our lips. 

Asshur cannot save us, 

Upon horses we will not ride, 

And we will not say any more ' our god ' 

To the work of our hands ; 

Thou by whom the orphan receives compassion. 
Yahweh. I will heal their apostasy, 

I will love them freely ; 

Eor my anger hath turned from him. 

I will be as the dew to Israel ; 

Let him bloom as the wild flower. 

And let him strike his roots like Lebanon, 

Let his shoots grow. 

And let his majesty be as the olive, 

And let him have scent like Lebanon ; 

Let those who abide in his shadow return, 

Let them quicken the corn. 



1 Ps. 247-10. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, p. 146. 



420 



STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



And let them bloom like the vine, 

And their memory be as the wine of Lebanon. 
Ephraim. What have I to do any more with idols ? 
Yahweh. I have responded, and I shall regard him. 
Ephraim. I am like a green cypress. 
Yahweh. Of me is thy fruit found. 
Prophet. Whoso is wise, let him understand these things ; 

Understanding, let him know them : 

That the ways of Yahweh are upright, 

And the righteous walk therein, 

But transgressors stumble therein, i 

3. The book of Isaiah, gives one of the grandest specimens : 

Prophet. Who, there, is coming from Edom, 

Stained red in his garments from Bozrah ; 

Who, there, made glorious in his apparel, 

Strutting in the greatness of his strength ? 
Yahweh. I that speak in righteousness, 

That am mighty to save. 
Prophet. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, 

And thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine fat ? 
Yahweh. I have trodden the wine-press alone ; 

And of the peoples there was no man with me : 

Yea, I have been treading them in mine anger, 

And trampling them in my fury, 

So that their juice is sprinkled upon my garments, 

And all my raiment I have stained. 

For the day of vengeance was in my heart ; 

And the year of my redeemed is come. 

Yea, I was looking and there was none to help ; 

And I was wondering and there was none to uphold ; 

And so mine own arm brought salvation for me. 

And my fury it upheld me. 

Verily, I have been stamping the peoples in mine anger, 

And I have been breaking them to pieces in my wrath, 

And I have been pouring down their juice on the earth.2 

The book of Job uses the dramatic element in a series of 
dialogues between Job and his friends, and concludes with the 
voice of God. The dramatic element reaches its climax among 
the Hebrews in the Song of Songs. 

The first act of the Song of Songs is as follows : 



Scene I 

Solo. Let him kiss me with some kisses of his mouth, 

For thy caresses are better than wine ; 
For scent thine ointments are excellent ; 

1 Hos. 142-10. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy^ pp. 176 t 

2 Is. 631-^. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy., pp. 313 seq. 



THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 



421 



O thou sweet ointment, poured forth as to thy name ! 

Therefore the virgins love thee. 
Solo. Oh ! Draw me ! 

Chorus. After thee we Will run ! 

Solo. O that the king had brought me to his apartment ! 

Chorus. We will rejoice and we will be glad with thee, 

We will celebrate thy caresses more than wine. 

Rightly they love thee. 

Scene II 
Shulamite. Dark am I — 
Chorus. — but lovely — 

Shulamite. — daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, 
Chorus. — as the curtains of Solomon. 
Shulamite. Gaze not upon me because I am swarthy, 

Because the sun scanned me : 

My mother's sons were angry with me. 

They set me as keeper of the vineyards ; 

My vineyard, which is my own, have I not kept. 

O tell me, thou whom my soul loveth : 

Where f eedest thou thy flock ? 

Where dost thou let them couch at noon ? 

Why should I be as one straying 

After the flocks of thy companions ? 
Chorus. If thou knowest not of thyself, thou fairest among women, 

Go forth for thyself at the heels of the flock. 

And feed thy kids at the tabernacles of the shepherds. 



Scene III 

Solomon. To my mare in the choice chariot of Pharaoh I liken thee, my 
friend, 

Lovely are thy cheeks in rows (of coin), thy neck in thy necklace ! 

Rows of gold we will make thee, with chains of silver. 
Shulamite. While the king was in his divan, my nard gave its scent. 

A bundle of myrrh, is my beloved to me, that lodgeth between 
my breasts ; 

A cluster of henna, is my beloved to me, in the vineyards of 
En Geddi. 
Solomon. Lo thou art lovely, my friend, 

Lo thine eyes are doves, 
Shulamite. Lo thou ait lovely, my beloved, 

Yea sweet, yea our arbor is green. 
Solomon. The timbers of our houses are cedar. 

Our wainscoting cypress. 
Shulamite. I am the flower of Sharon, 

The anemone of the valleys. 
Solomon. As the anemone among the thorns, 

So is my friend among the daughters. 
Shulamite. As the apricot among the trees of the wood, 

So is my beloved among the sons. 

In its shadow I delighted to sit, 



422 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

And its fruit was sweet to my taste. 

that he had brought me to the vineyard, 
His banner over me being love — 

Sustain me with raisin-cakes, support me with apricots ; 

For I am love sick — 

His left hand would be under my head, 

His right hand would embrace me. 

1 adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles, 
Or by the hinds of the field that ye arouse not, 

And that ye stir not up love till it please. 



V. The Poetry of Wisdom 

There are many fine pieces of composite poetry in Hebrew 
Wisdom. I shall give as an example the finest piece of ethics 
in the Old Testament,^ where the strophes vary with the 
theme : 

1. A covenant have I concluded with my eyes ; 
How then should I consider a maiden ? 
Else what portion of Eloah from above. 

Or inheritance of Shadday from on high ? 
Is there not destruction for the evil doer ; 
And calamity for the worker of iniquity ? 
Is He not seeing my ways ; 
And all my steps counting ? 

2. If I have walked with falsehood. 

And my foot has made haste unto deceit ; 
Let Him weigh me in righteous balances, 
That Eloah may know my integrity ! 
If my step used to incline from the way, 
And after my eyes my heart did walk. 
And to my palms a spot did cleave, 
Let me sow and let another eat, 
And as for my crops, let them be rooted out. 

3. If my heart hath been seduced unto a woman, 
And at the door of my neighbour I have Inrked, 
Let my wife grind the mill for another. 

And over her let others bend ; 

For that were infamy ; 

And that were an iniquity for the judges ; 

For it is a fire that devoureth unto Abaddon, 

And in all my increase it rooteth up. 

4. If I used to refuse the right of my slave. 

Or my maid servant, when they plead with me ; 
What could I do when God should rise up, 

1 Job 31. 



THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 423 

And when He would investigate, what could I respond to Him ? 
Did not, in the womb, my Maker make him, 
And One Being form us in the belly ? 

5. If I used to keep back the weak from his desire, 
And caused the eye of the widow to fail, 

And ate my portion alone, 

And the orphan did not eat of it : — 

Nay — from my youth did he grow up unto me as a father ; 

And from the womb of my mother I was accustomed to guide her. 

6. If I could see a man ready to perish without clothing 
And the poor having no covering — 

Surely his loins blessed me. 

And from the fleece of my sheep he warmed himself. 

If I lifted up my hand over the orphan. 

When I saw my help in the gate — 

My shoulder — let it fall from its blade. 

And my arm — let it be broken from its bone ! 

For there was fear unto me of calamity from God, 

And because of His majesty I could not. 

7. If I have made gold my confidence, 

And unto tine gold said, thou art my trust ; 

If I used to rejoice that my wealth was great, 

And that my hand had found vast resources ; 

If I used to see the light that it was shining brightly, 

And the moon moving in splendour. 

So that my heart was enticed in secret. 

And my hand kissed my mouth : — 

This also were an iniquity for judges, 

Eor I had denied El on high. 

8. If I was accustomed to rejoice in the calamity of the one hating me, 
Or was excited with joy when evil overtook him ; — 

Nay ! I did not give my palate to sinning, 

In asking with a curse his life. 

Verily the men of my tent say : 

Who can shew us one not filled with his meat ? 

Without the stranger used not to lodge. 

My doors to the caravan I used to open. 

9. If against me my land crieth, 
And together its furrows weep ; 

If its strength I have eaten without silver, 
And the life of its lord I have caused to expire ; 
Instead of wheat let thorns come forth, 
And evil weeds instead of barley .^ 

10. If I have covered as man my transgression. 
Hiding in my bosom my iniquity ; 

1 This strophe has been misplaced in the Hebrew text. It does not come 
appropriately at the close of the piece. I have accordingly transposed strophes 
9 and 10. 



424 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Because I feared the great multitude, 

And tlie contempt of the clans made me afraid ; 

And so was silent, would not go out to the gate : — 

O that I had one to hear me — 

Behold my mark ! — Let Shad day answer me ! 

that I had the bill (of accusation) my adversary has written ! 
Surely I would lift it up on my shoulder, 

1 would bind it as a crown of glory upon me, 
The number of my steps would I declare to him, 
As a prince I would approach him. 



VI. Prophetic Poetry 

I shall finally present a specimen of prophetic poetry from 
the great unknown prophet of the exile, and, indeed, the most 
sublime piece in the Old Testament, as well as one of the most 
artistic,^ consisting of five gradually increasing strophes. 

1. Behold my servant shall prosper. 

He shall be lifted up and exalted and be very high. 

According as many were astonished at thee — 

So disfigured more than a man was his appearance, 

And his form than the sons of men ; — 

So shall he startle many nations ; 

Because of him kings will stop their mouths ; 

For what had not been told them they shall see, 

And what they had not heard they shall attentively consider. 

2. Who believed our message, 

And the arm of Yahweh, unto whom was it revealed ? 

"When he grew up as a suckling plant before us. 

And as a root out of a dry ground ; 

He had no form and no majesty that we should see him. 

And no appearance that we should take pleasure in him ; 

Despised and forsaken of men ! 

A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief ! 

And as one before whom there is a hiding of the face ! 

Despised, and we regarded him not ! 

S. Verily our griefs he bore 

And our sorrows — he carried them. 

Yet we regarded him as stricken, 

Smitten of God, and humbled. 

But he was one pierced because of our transgressions, 

Crushed because of our iniquities ; 

The chastisement for our peace was upon him ; 

And by his stripes there is healing for us. 

We all like sheep strayed away ; 

Each one turned to his own way. 

While Yahweh caused to light on him the iniquity of us all. 

1 Is. 5213-53. 



THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY 425 

4. He was harassed while he was humbling himself, 
And he opens not his mouth ; 

Like a sheep that is being led to the slaughter 

And as an ewe that before her shearers is dumb ; — 

And he opens not his mouth. 

From oppression and from judgment he was taken away, 

And among his cotemporaries who was considering, 

That he was cut off from the land of the living, 

Because of the transgression of my people, one smitten for them ? 

With the wicked his grave was assigned, 

But he was with the rich in his martyr death ; 

Because that he had done no violence. 

And there was no deceit in his mouth. 

5. But Yahweh was pleased to crush him with grief ! 
When he himself offers a trespass offering, 

He shajl see a seed, he shall prolong days ; 

And the pleasure of Yahweh will prosper in his hands : 

On account of his own travail he shall see ; 

He shall be satisfied with his knowledge : 

My righteous servant shall justify many, 

And their iniquities he shall carry. 

Therefore will I give him a portion consisting of the many, 

And with the strong shall he divide spoil ; 

Because that he exposed himself to death, 

And he was numbered with transgressors, 

And he did bear the sin of many, 

And for transgressors was interposing. 

In such pieces as these we find the climax of Hebrew poetic 
art, where the dramatic and heroic elements combine to pro- 
duce in a larger whole, ethical and religious results with won- 
derful power. While these do not present us epic or dramatic 
or pastoral poems in the classic sense, they yet use the epic, 
dramatic, and pastoral elements in perfect freedom, combining 
them in a simple and comprehensive manner for the highest 
and grandest purposes of the prophet and sage inspired of God, 
giving us productions of poetic art that are unique in the 
world's literature. The dramatic, epic, and pastoral elements 
are means used freely and fully, but not ends. These forms of 
beauty and grace do not retard the imagination in admiration 
of themselves, but direct it to the grandest themes and images 
of piety and devotion. The wise men of Israel present us in 
the ideals of the Shulamite, Job, and Koheleth, types of noble 
character, moral heroism, and purity that transcend the heroic 
types of the Iliad or ^neid^ wrestling as they do with foes to 



426 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

their souls far more terrible than the spears and javelins and 
warring gods of Greek or Trojan, advancing step by step, 
through scene after scene and act after act, to holy victory in 
the fear of God ; victories that will serve in all time for the 
support and comfort of the human race, which has ever to meet 
the same inconsistencies of evil, the same assaults on virtue, 
the same struggle with doubt and error, therein so vividly and 
faithfully portrayed to us. The prophets of Israel play upon 
the great heart of the Hebrew people as upon a thousand- 
stringed lyre, striking the tones with divinely guided touch, 
so that from the dirge of rapidly succeeding disaster and ruin, 
they rise through penitence and petition to faith, assurance, ex- 
ultation, and hallelujah ; laying hold of the deep thoughts and 
everlasting faithfulness of God ; binding the past and present 
as by a chain of light to the impending Messianic future ; see- 
ing and rejoicing in the glory of God, which, though now for 
a season shrouded behind the clouds of disaster, is soon to 
burst forth in a unique day.^ 

iZech. 146 ^«2-. 



CHAPTER XVIII 

THE HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Word of God came to man at first orally, in connection 
with theophanies. These theophanies are divine manifestations 
in forms of time and space. From them, as centres, went forth 
divine influences in word of revelation and deed of miracle. 
These theophanies attained their culmination in Jesus Christ, 
the incarnate, risen, and glorified Saviour. The Word of God, 
issuing from these theophanic centres, was appropriated more 
and more by holy men, upon whom the Divine Spirit came, 
taking possession of them, influencing and directing them in the 
exercise of prophetic ministry. An important part of this min- 
istry was the oral delivery of the Divine Word to the people of 
God in ascending stages of revelation. This Word was gradu- 
ally committed to writing, and assumed the literary forms that 
are presented to us in the Canon of Scripture. 

The Word of God, as written, is to be appropriated by man 
through reading it, meditating upon it, and putting it in practice. 
Reading is an appropriation through the eye and ear and sense 
perception, of letters, words, and sentences as signs of thought. 
Meditation is the use of the faculties of the mind in the appre- 
hension of the substance of thought and emotion contained in 
these signs, the association of it with other things, and the 
application of it to other conditions and circumstances. This 
appropriation must be in accordance with the laws of the appre- 
hending human soul, with the principles of the composition of 
written documents, and also with the nature of the things con- 
tained in and expressed by the sensible signs. Biblical inter- 
pretation is a section of general interpretation, and it differs 
from other special branches in accordance with the internal 
character of the contents of the Bible. Interpretation is usually 

427 



428 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

regarded as a section of applied logic. ^ Schleiermacher defines 
it as the art of correctly understanding an author ; ^ Klausen ^ 
as '' the scientific establishment and development of the funda- 
mental principles and rules for the understanding of a given 
discourse." I am constrained to think that this is too narrow a 
definition. I agree with most interpreters in the opinion that 
it embraces not only the art of understanding an author, but 
also the art of exposition or explanation of an author to others.* 
I am also compelled to go still further and include as a part of 
interpretation the practical application of the substance of the 
writing to other appropriate conditions and circumstances. The 
older interpreters, especially among the Puritans, regarded this 
latter as the chief feature. The interpreter needs, according to 
the older writers, oratio, meditatio, et tentatio. This tentatio^ 
trial, experience, is the most important of all. This was urged 
by Jesus : " If any man willeth to do His will, he shall know 
of the teaching, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from 
myself."^ Bernard says: "He rightly reads Scripture who 
turns words into deeds." Francis Roberts says : " The mighti- 
est man in practice, will in the end prove the mightiest man in 
Scripture. Theory is the guide of practice, practice the life of 
theory ; where Scripture, contemplation, and experience meet 
together in the same persons, true Scripture understanding 
must needs be heightened and doubled."^ 

Biblical interpretation is the central department of Biblical 
Study whence all other departments derive their material. In 
this field the strifes and struggles of centuries have taken place. 
There is no department of study where there have been so many 
differences, and where there still remains so much confusion. 
The Bible has human features and divine features. To under- 

1 See Carpzov, Primoe Lineoe Herm. , Helmstadii, 1790, p. 5 ; Sir William 
Hamilton, Logic, p. 474 ; Klausen, Hermeneutik des JVeuen Testaments, Leipzig, 
1841, p. 7. 

2 Hermeneutik und Kritik, Berlin, 1838, p. 3. ^ jn z.c, p. 1. 

* Ernesti, Institutio Interp. JV, T., 1761, § 10 ; Principles of Interpretation, 
ed. Moses Stuart, Andover, 4th ed., 1842, pp. 14 seq.; Morus, Hermeneutica 
N. jT., ed. Eichstadt, Lips., 1797, I. pp. 3 seq. ; Immer, Hermeneutics, Andover 
edition, 1877, p. 10. s john 7i'. 

6 Clavis Bihliorum, 4th ed., London, 1675, p. 11 ; see, also, Rambach, Insti' 
tutiones Hermeneuticce, Jena, 1723, 8th ed., 1764, pp. 2 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 429 

stand them in their harmonious combination is the secret of inter- 
pretation. This secret is the philosopher's stone after which 
multitudes of interpreters have been seeking through the 
Christian centuries. As Lange appropriately says : ^ 

" As Christ has overcome the world by his cross, as the blood of 
the martyrs has become the seed of the Church, so also the miscon- 
ceptions and abuse of the Bible have been obliged to more and 
more redound to its glorification. The battle of Biblical Criticism 
in the first four centuries brought about the collection and estab- 
lishment of a purified canon ; the arbitrariness of copyists occa- 
sioned the collection of codices and the criticism of the text ; the 
exegesis of the allegorical method, called into life the vindication 
of the historical sense of Scripture ; the fourfold enchaining of the 
Bible by exegetical tradition, hierarchical guardianship, ecclesias- 
tical decisions, the Latin language, raised the Bible in the Protes- 
tant world almost above the dignity of a historical revelation of 
God; the humanistic exposition, as well as the naturalistic ex- 
planation of miracles, called into life along with the New Testa- 
ment Grammar, also the understanding of the New Testament 
idiom, over against its customary depreciation in comparison with 
the classic models ; and finally the pantheistic criticism occasioned 
the revival and rich imfolding of evangelical history." 

We shall first consider the history of biblical interpretation, 
then on the basis of its history state its principles and methods. 

I. Rabbinical Interpretation 

The Jewish Rabbinical schools from the most ancient times 
recognized, alongside of the written Word of God, another oral 
or traditional Word of much greater extent and authority de- 
livered to the ancient teachers, and handed down from genera- 
tion to generation in the esoteric teaching of the faithful scribes, 
as the official interpretation of the written Word. This was 
not only the view of the Pharisees, who subsequently committed 
this tradition to writing in the Mishnas and Talmuds,^ but also 
of the Zealots and Essenes. It was claimed that this oral 
Divine Word had been faithfully handed down from Ezra,^ who 
received it by divine inspiration as esoteric wisdom for the 

1 Grundriss der hihlischen Hermeneutik, Heidelberg, 1878, p. xxi. 

2 Weber, System d. Altsynagogalen Pdlestinischen Theologie, 1880, Leipzig, 
pp. 92 seq. '^ See p. 257. 



430 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

initiated disciples. Others claimed a still higher antiquity for 
it, going back to Joshua and the elders, and even in part to the 
twelve patriarchs, Enoch, and Adam : hence the large number 
of pseudepigraphs in which this wisdom is contained, as well as 
in the Talmuds. 

This traditional interpretation was of two kinds, Halaoha 
and Haggada. The Halacha was legal, containing an immense 
number of casuistic distinctions, making fences about the Law 
in wider and wider sweep till the Law itself became for the peo- 
ple of God as inaccessible as the temple of Ezekiel, into which 
none but the priests of the line of Zadok might enter. The 
Haggada was illustrative and practical, embracing a wealth of 
legend and allegory that so coloured and enlarged biblical his- 
tory that it became as obscure as the New Testament history 
upon the palimpsests under the legends of the monks that were 
written over it. 

From the older Halacha and Haggada methods of interpre- 
tation were subsequently separated the Peshat and the Sodh. 
The Peshat is the determination of the literal sense, and is 
really a branch of the Halacha. The Sodh is the determination 
of the mystical or allegorical sense, and is a species of the 
Haggada.^ 

The rules of Rabbinical interpretation gradually increased in 
extent. Seven rules of the Halacha are ascribed to Hillel in 
the Siphra.^ These are enlarged in the Baraitha of R. Ismaell 
to thirteen.^ 

These rules are : (1) That which is true of the easier or less 
is true of the greater or more difficult, and the reverse ; (2) two 
similar passages supplement one another ; (3) that which is 
clearly established in one part of Scripture is to be presumed 
in interpreting others ; (4-11) eight rules with reference to 
the relation of the genus to the species, by inclusion, exclusion, 
contrast, and their relation to a third term, in the forms of 

1 Wogue in Z.c, pp. 134, 164 seq. 

2 These are given by Schtirer, N. T. Zeiigeschichte, 1874, p. 447, and Hausrath, 
Zeit Jesu, Heidelberg, p. 96. 

3 Chiarini in I.e., 1. pp. QQ seq. ; Weber in I.e., pp. 106 seq. Tlie best state- 
ment of them, with ample illustrations, is given by Waelmer, Antiquitates 
Ebrceorum, Gottingae., 1743, pp. 422 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 431 

Rabbinical logic : (12) the word is determined by the context, 
and the sentence by the scope of the passage ; (13) when two 
verses contradict, we must wait for a third to explain them. 
Some of these rules are excellent, and so far as the practical 
logic of the times went, cannot be disputed. The fault of Rab- 
binical exegesis was less in the rules than in their application, 
although latent fallacies are not difficult to discover in them, 
and they do not sufficiently guard against slips of argument. ^ 

The Haggada method was elaborated by R. Eliezar into 
thirty-two rules. ^ 

The principles of the two methods are admirably summed up 
by Wogue : 

"These forty -five rules may all be reduced to two fundamental 
considerations. (1) Nothing is fortuitous, arbitrary, or indifferent 
in the Word of God. Pleonasm, ellipsis, grammatical anomaly, 
transposition of words or facts, everything is calculated, every- 
thing has its end and would teach us something. The casual, the 
approximate, the insignificant and inconsequential flower of rhet- 
oric, all that belongs to the setting in human language, are strange 
to the severe precision of Biblical language. (2) As the image 
of its author, who is one by Himself and manifold in His manifes- 
tations, the Bible often conceals in a single word a crowd of 
thoughts ; many a phrase, which appears to express a simple and 
single idea, is susceptible of diverse senses and numberless inter- 
pretations independent of the fundamental difference between 
literal exegesis and free exegesis, in short, as the Talmud says, 
after the Bible itself, the divine word is like fire which divides 
itself into a thousand sparks, or a rock which breaks into number- 
less fragments under the hammer that attacks it. These two 
points of view, I repeat, are the soul of the Midrash in general ; 
the latter above all serves as the common basis of the Halacha 
and Haggada, and it explains, better than any other theory, the 
long domination of the midrash exegesis in the synagogue." ^ 

This admirable statement shows the radical errors of the 
Rabbinical idea of the Scriptures : (1) everything must be in- 

1 A very useful illustration of all these rules is given in Mielziner, Introduc- 
tion to the Talmud^ 1897, pp. 117-187. He concludes by saying : "This system of 
artificial interpretation was mainly calculated to offer the means of ingrafting the 
tradition on the stem of Scripture, or harmonizing the oral with the written law." 

2 Selections of these are given by Chiarini in Z.c, I. p. 81. A full statement, 
with ample illustrations, is given by Waehner in Z.c, I. pp. 396 seq. 

3 Wogue in I.e., p. 169. 



432 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

terpreted in accordance with that severe precision, which alone 
is worthy of God ; (2) the Scriptures are altogether divine and 
have the same attributes of uniti/ and infinity that God Himself 
has. 

The Sodh was used in the most ancient times by the Essenes 
and Zealots and found expression in the numerous apocalypses 
and pseudepigraphs of the four centuries in the midst of which 
the Messiah appeared. It attained its culmination in the Cab- 
alistic system of the thirteenth century. ^ These mystics re- 
garded every letter of the Bible as so highly important that it 
contained a secret sense for the initiated. The book of Sohar ^ 
describes the system in the following parable : 

" Like a beautiful woman, concealed in the interior of her palace, 
who when her friend and beloved passes by, opens for a moment a 
secret window and is seen by him alone, and then withdraws herself 
immediately and disappears for a long time, so the doctrine only 
shows herself to the chosen, (i.e., to him who is devoted to her body 
and soul) ; and even to him not always in the same manner. At first 
she simply beckons at the passer-by with her hand, and it generally 
depends upon his understanding this gentle hint. This is the 
interpretation known by the name 1^^. Afterwards she ap- 
proaches him a little closer, lisps him a few words, but her form 
is still covered with a thick veil which his looks cannot penetrate. 
This is the so-called tTI*!*!. She then converses with him with 
her face covered by a thin veil ; this is the enigmatical language 
of rn^n. After having thus become accustomed to her society, 
she at last shows herself face to face and entrusts him with 
the innermost secrets of her heart. This is the secret of the law 

There are three principles of Cabalistic interpretations : (1) 
Notariqon — to reconstruct a word by using the initials of many, 
or a sentence by using all the letters of a single word for initial 
letters of other words ; (2) Grhematria — the use of the numeri- 
cal values of the letters of a word for purposes of comparison 
with other words which yield the same or similar combina- 
tions of numbers ; (3) Temura — the permutation of letters 

1 Ginsburg, Kabbalah, London, 1865. 2 n. 99. 

3 1 give the translation of Ginsburg in I.e., p. 130; comp. Siegfried, Philo 
von Alexandria als Ausleger des Alt. Test., 1875, Jena, p. 291. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 433 

by the three Cabalistic alphabets, called 'Atbach, ^Alham^ and 
'Athhash,^ 

The Peshat^ or literal interpretation, is used in the Targum 
of Onkelos, and the Greek version of Aquila, with reference to 
the Law, but found little representation among the ancient 
Jews. The Qarites were the first to emphasize it in the eighth 
century. Before this time there is no trace of Hebrew gram- 
mar, or Hebrew dictionary. The Qarites threw off the yoke 
of Rabbinical Halacha, and devoted themselves to ihQ literal 
sense and became extreme literalists. Influenced by them, 
Saadia introduced the literal method into the Rabbinical 
schools, and used it as the most potent weapon to overcome 
the Qarites. He became the father of Jewish exegesis in the 
Middle Ages, and was followed by a large number of distin- 
guished scholars, who have left monuments of Jewish learning. ^ 
Wogue attributes this rise of the literal method to the influence 
of Arabic learning at Bagdad, Bassora, and Cairo. But the 
Arabs and the Persians received their impulses from the Nesto- 
rian schools of Edessa and Nisibis, which mediated the transition 
of Greek learning to the Orient, which also from the times of 
Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Lucius of Samosata, had been 
chiefly characterized by their historic method of exegesis.^ 

Thus in Judaism there grew up three great parties which 
struggled with one another during the Middle Ages. The 
sacred Scriptures of the Old Testament were buried under a 
mass of tradition that was heaped upon them more and more 
for centuries, until it became necessary for the interpreter who 
would understand the holy word itself to force his way through 
this mass, as at the present day one who would find the ancient 
Jerusalem must dig through eighteen centuries of debris under 
which it has been buried in the strifes of nations. 

There is doubtless truth at the bottom of all these systems. 
There is a certain propriety in distinguishing the fourfold sense. 
The literal sense will not apply except to the plainest matter-of- 

1 See Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, London, 1865, pp. 131 seq. ; Wogue in I.e., 
pp. 274 seq.; Chiarini in I.e., pp. 95 seq.; Siegfried in I.e., pp. 290 seq.; 
Etheridge, Jerusalem and Tiberias, Sora and Cordova, 1856, pp. 354 seq. 

2 Wogue in I.e., pp. 208 seq. ; Etheridge, I.e., p. 226. 3 p. 193. 



434 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

fact passages ; the Haggada method is necessary in the rhetori- 
cal parts of Scripture. The Halacha method is necessary for 
the determination of the principles embedded in the Scriptures. 
The Sodh method is necessary in the interpretation of prophetic 
symbolism, and the esoteric instruction of the Bible. If each 
of these four methods had been restricted to its own appro- 
priate sphere in the Bible, they would have cooperated with 
great advantage ; but where these methods are applied at the 
same time to the same passages with the view that the Scripture 
has a manifold sense ; where again these methods are applied 
arbitrarily to all passages ; where they are used to remove diffi- 
culties and to maintain traditional opinions ; or where any one 
method is made to usurp the functions of all, — there can only 
result — as there did result in fact — the utmost arbitrariness 
and confusion. The Bible was no longer interpreted ; it was 
used as the slave of traditional systems and sectarian prejudices. 

II. Hellenistic Interpretation 

The Hellenistic Jews were largely under the influence of the 
Platonic philosophy, which they sought to reconcile with the 
Old Testament Scriptures. The chief of the Hellenistic Jews 
is Philo of Alexandria. Philo was not a Hebrew scholar, but 
was acquainted with the Aramaic of Palestine, and probably 
also with the ancient Hebrew.^ He does not use the Hebrew 
text, but bases himself entirely on the Greek version, and uses 
tradition in its two forms of Halacha and Haggada, but especially 
the latter, which he elaborates in the direction of the Sodh or 
allegorical method. He distinguishes between the literal sense 
and the allegorical as between the body and the soul.^ The 
sense like a fluid pervades the letter. The allegory is a wise 
architect who builds on the ground of the Scriptures an 
architectural structure.^ 

The allegorical method of Philo is so well stated by Siegfried, 
that I shall build upon him in detail, while I pursue my own 
method in a more general arrangement. There are three rules to 
determine when the literal sense is excluded : (1) when anything 

1 Siegfried in Z.c, pp. 141 seq. ^ j)q rnigr. Abraham^ xvl. 

3 De Somn., IL 2. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 435 

is said unworthy of God ; (2) when it presents an insoluble diffi- 
culty ; (3) when the expression is allegorical. The last rule 
alone is sound, the others are a priori^ and result in the imposi- 
tion on the Scriptures of the preconceptions and prejudices of 
the interpreter. The rules of Philo's allegorical method given 
by Siegfried are twenty-three in number. ^ I shall arrange them 
under four heads in a somewhat different order. 

I. Grammatical allegory. An allegory is indicated in the 
use of certain particles ; in the modifications of words by pre- 
fixes or affixes ; in stress upon number of noun and tense of 
verb ; in gender of words ; in the use or absence of the article. 
Here grammatical exegesis is insufficient ; there are mysterious 
hidden meanings to be found in these grammatical peculiarities. 

II. Rhetorical allegory is found : in the repetition of words ; 
in redundancy of style ; in reiteration of statement ; in changes 
of expression ; in S3aionyms ; in play upon words ; in striking 
expressions ; in position of words ; in unusual connections of 
verses ; in the omission of what would be expected ; in the 
unexpected use of terms. Here rhetorical exegesis is insuffi- 
cient ; there must be a hidden sense in any departure from the 
plain prosaic form. 

III. Allegory hy means of new combinations is gained : by 
changing the punctuation ; by giving a word all its possible 
meanings ; by internal modifications of the word ; by new com- 
binations of words. This method was more fully wrought out 
by the Cabalists^ and is the most abnormal of all forms of 
allegory. 

IV. Symbolism is of three kinds : of numbers, of things, 
and of names. This method is the most appropriate of the 
forms of allegory ; its propriety is recognized by modern exe- 
gesis when used within due bounds. 

To Philo and his school the inner sense attained by allegory 
was the real sense designed by God. The method of Philo 
was doubtless used to a great extent among the Essenes and 
the Zealots. There are traces of it in the pseudepigraphs and 
apocryphal books that were composed in the time of Philo. 
Josephus was also influenced by Philo, and was inclined to the 
1 In I.e., pp. 165 seq. 2 gee p. 432. 



436 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

use of allegory, as we see from his treatment of the tabernacle.^ 
There is truth at the bottom of the allegorical method, namely, 
that human language is inadequate to convey the thoughts of 
God to man. At the best it can only be a sign and external 
representation. We must go back of the sign to the thing 
signified. The mistake of the allegorical method is in extend- 
ing it beyond its legitimate bounds, and making every word and 
syllable and letter of Scripture an allegory of some kind, and 
in using it to escape difficulties of philosophy and theology, 
and in order to maintain peculiar religious views. 

III. The Interpretation of the Old Testament in 
THE New Testament 

The writings of New Testament Scripture use and interpret 
Old Testament Scripture. It is important for us to determine 
the nature and principles of this interpretation, and its relation 
to the Rabbinical and Hellenistic methods. 

In the Old Testament prior to the exile, the prophets use 
earlier writings by way of citation rather than interpretation. 
This use is in the nature of free reproduction and application 
rather than an exposition of their sense. During the periods 
of oral revelation and prophecy, the interpretation of ancient 
Scripture was of little importance. It was only when prophecy 
ceased, and oral revelations were discontinued, that it was 
necessary to ascertain the divine will by the interpretation of 
ancient written documents. 

After the exile, Ezra introduced the more systematic study 
of the Scripture, and established the midrash method, in seek- 
ing for the meaning of ancient Scriptures and their application 
to the present. The people were assembled, and Ezra and the 
Levites " read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and 
gave the sense, and they understood in the reading. "^ The aim 
of Ezra and his associates was to make the law of God so plain 
that the people generally could understand it. 

The New Testament writers constantly use the Old Testa- 
ment. Do they employ the methods in use by the Palestinian 

1 Antiq., III. 7, 7 ; Siegfried in I.e., pp. 278 seq. 2 ^eh. S\ 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 437 

and Hellenistic Jews of their time ? Different answers have 
been given to this question from partisan points of view. It 
is important to ascertain the real facts of the case. The most 
important use of the Scripture is ever the last and the highest 
in the process of interpretation, namely, practical interpretation 
or application ; for the divine revelation has in view, above 
all, human conduct. This is most frequently employed in the 
New Testament by Jesus and His apostles. The most familiar 
example is in the temptation of Jesus, when He overcomes 
Satan by the application of the words of the law : " Man shall 
not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out 
of the mouth of God; " ''Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy 
God ; " " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only 
shalt thou serve." 1 These will suffice, also, as specimens of 
the literal interpretation as used by Jesus. 

In conflict with the Pharisees He usually employs the 
Halacha method as most appropriate to controversy with them, 
defeating them with their own weapons. Thus He employed 
Ps. 82^, arguing from the greater to the less. 

" Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods ? If He 
called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the 
Scripture cannot be broken), say ye of him, whom the Father 
sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest ; because I 
said, I am the Son of God ? " ^ 

He used the Halacha method of arguing from the inner con- 
trast of general and particular in Ps. IIO^. 

"How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying: 
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I 
put thine enemies underneath thy feet ? If David then calleth 
him Lord, how is he his son ? " ^ 

Again in the interpretation of the Sabbath law Matthew let 
Jesus quote from 1 Sam. 21^-^; Num. 289"i'^ ; Hos. 6^; on the 
principle that Scripture passages may be used to supplement 
one another. 

" Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungered, 
and they that were with him ; how he entered into the house of 

1 Mt. 44-10. 2 John 1034-36. 3 Mt. 2243-45. See p. 264. 



438 STUDY or holy scripture 

God, and did eat the shew-bread, which it was not lawful for him 
to eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the 
priests ? [Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sab- 
bath day the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are 
guiltless ? But I say unto you, that one greater than the temple 
is here. But if ye had known what this meaneth, I desire mercy, 
and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.] 
For the son of man is lord of the Sabbath." ^ 

In these and similar instances Jesus interprets Scripture, as 
a Jewish rabbin, after the Halaclia method, with which the 
Pharisees were familiar, and to which they were accustomed in 
discussion and argument. 

Jesus also employs the Haggada method. This indeed is 
His own favourite method of teaching, inasmuch as His dis- 
courses were in the main addressed to the people. His method 
of illustration and enforcement of truth is perfect in its kind, 
as only a divine master could fashion it. If we take the series 
of parables in Lk. 15 as an example, what could be more 
simple, appropriate, beautiful, and impressive ? They have 
been the gospel of redemption to millions of our race. A few 
examples may be given of this method of interpretation. In 
reply to the bald literalism of the ruler of the synagogue. 

" There are six days in which men ought to work : in them 
therefore come and be healed, and not on the day of the Sab- 
bath ; " Jesus says : " Ye hypocrites, doth not each one of you on 
the Sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him 
away to the watering ? And ought not this woman, being a 
daughter of Abraham, whom Satan had bound, lo, eighteen years, 
to have been loosed from this bond on the day of the Sabbath ? " ^ 

In the interpretation of prophecy and history Jesus comes 
into connection with the allegorical method of interpretation, 
and it has been claimed that He applies it with the freedom of 
a Hellenist. In His first discourse in the synagogue of Naza- 
reth^ He interprets the prophecy Is. 61 as applying to Him- 
self. This prophecy is in its nature figurative, as it presents 

1 Mt. 124-8. But Mk. 225-28 and Lk. G^-s omit the bracketed clause. It is evi- 
dent that Matthew is responsible for this heaping-up of citations from the Old 
Testament. Jesus, according to Mark, uses here the argument from the general 
to the particular, when he says, " The Sabbath was made for man, and not man 
for the Sabbath." 2 Lk. ISi^^^j. 3 Lk. 4i<^22. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPKETATION 439 

the servant of Yahweh in his faithful preaching to the people. 
Jesus correctly sees the inner sense of the passage and finds 
His own likeness depicted there. Jesus interprets the corner- 
stone of Ps. 11822-23 a,s referring to Himself and His kingdom.^ 
This is not a prophecy in the original passage, but a symboli- 
cal representation of the reestablishment of the kingdom of 
God. The work of Jesus was preeminently such a work. 
Hence the inner sense affords the connection that makes the 
use of the symbol appropriate. A touching example of the 
historical allegory is the caution of Jesus,^ " Remember Lot's 
wife," ^ in connection with His prediction of the judgment upon 
Jerusalem and the nations. 

I shall now examine some of the most striking passages, in 
which certain distinguishing features of our Saviour's inter- 
pretation appear. 

The Sadducees came to Him with a difficult case under a 
general law.^ 

" Moses wrote unto us,^ If a man's brother die, and leave a 
wife behind him, and leave no child, that his brother should 
take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother." 

The case is : " There were seven brethren : and the first took 
a wife, and dying left no seed ; and the second took her, and 
died, leaving no seed behind him ; and the third likewise : 
and the seven left no seed. Last of all the woman also died. 
In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of them ? For the 
seven had her to w^ife." 

Jesus does not determine this case by an appeal to Holy 
Scripture, but on His own authority delivers a doctrine which 
settles it: "For when they rise from the dead they neither 
marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven." 
He takes occasion, however, to overcome the Sadducean denial 
of a resurrection by an appeal to the Law : ^ " Have ye not 
read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, ' I am 
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of 
Jacob?' God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." 
It is clear that our Saviour takes the passage out of its context 

1 Mt, 214^-44 = Mk. 1210-11 ^ Lk, 2017-18. 2 j^k. 1732. 3 Qen. 1926. 

4 Mk. 1218-27 = Mt. 2223-32 =; Lk. 2027-38. 5 pgut. 255. 6 Ex. 36. 



440 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and gives it a meaning which is not explicitly there. Where, 
then, is the justification for His interpretation, and what is the 
method of it ? He derives from the statement of the covenant 
relation between God and the patriarchs, the principle that 
God being a living God, the relation is a vital relation, and 
therefore those who are in this relation are living ones as 
possessors of the life they have received from God, the foun- 
tain of life. 

The continuation in life of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob after 
they died to this life implies that they as well as their seed 
will eventually enjoy all the blessings God promised them. 
These they cannot enjoy unless they take part in the resur- 
rection. All this is implicitly contained in the words cited; 
but it cannot be inferred except by the stress on the living 
God and His power, which Jesus added to the original passage. 
A similar argument was used by an ancient rabbi from another 
passage of the Law.^ 

" Go in and possess the land which Yahweh sware unto your 
fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give unto them 
and to their seed after them." The rabbi called the attention 
of his hearers to the fact that Yahweh sware to give the land 
to them^ and not to give it to you. 

Jesus uses the laws of the Tables,^ and contrasts His own 
interpretation of them with the traditional interpretation. 
The latter looked at the external letter and warped this into 
accordance with traditional theory and practice. The former 
enters into the internal spirit. Jesus goes in His interpreta- 
tion beyond any human propriety, and interprets them from 
the point of view of the divine Lawgiver Himself. No human 
interpreter would be justified in following the Master thither. 
It is His sovereign prerogative so to interpret. 

Jesus recognizes the principle of accommodation in the use 
of the Old Testament.^ The law of divorce was granted by 
Moses, owing to the hardness of the hearts of the people of 
his time. That law was, however, inconsistent with the original 
divine ideal at the creation. And here again Jesus interprets 
from the mind of God in the Halacha method, the words: 
^ Deut. 18. 2 Mt. 5-1 ''1: 3 Mt. 193 ^«7 . 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 441 

" For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, 
and shall cleave to his wife ; and the twain shall become one 
flesh." 1 This He interprets by laying hold of the great 
thought: '-^ one flesh.''' "So that they are no more twain, but 
one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not 
man put asunder. "^ No one would ever have thought of this 
interpretation but Jesus, who interpreted the mind of God, 
the creator of man and the author of marriage. 
Jesus after His resurrection said : 

" These are my words which I spake mito you, while I was yet 
with yon, how that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are 
written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, con- 
cerning me. Then opened he their mind, that they might under- 
stand the Scriptures 5 and he said unto them, Thus it is written, 
that the Messiah should suffer, and rise again from the dead the 
third day ; and that repentance and remission of sins should be 
preached in his name unto all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.''^ 

Here our Saviour grasps the entire Old Testament revelation 
in its unity, and represents Himself and His kingdom as its cen- 
tral theme. The same is the case in the institution of the Lord's 
Supper, where He represents the feast as the new covenant feast 
over against the old covenant sacrifice. 

Jesus Christ, in His method of interpretation, thus laid down 
the distinctive principles of scriptural interpretation which en- 
abled His apostles to understand the Old Testament, and de- 
livered them from the perils of the allegorical and legal 
methods of His times. He uses the four kinds of biblical in- 
terpretation, in accordance with the usage of the various classes 
of men in His times, in those ways that were familiar to the 
Rabbinical school, the synagogue instruction, the popular au- 
dience, and the esoteric training of the disciple. He uses all 
that was appropriate in these methods : but never employs any 
of the casuistry or hair-splitting Halacha of the scribes ; or any 
of the idle tales and absurd legends of the Haggada; or any of the 
strange combinations and fanciful reconstructions of the Sodh 
of the Alexandrians. His use of Scripture is simple, beautiful, 
profound, and sublime. One sees through the Divine Master 

1 Gen. 224. 2 See pp. 87 seq. ^ Lk. 24^4 «?.. 



442 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

that the written Word is the mirror of the mincl of God ; and 
the eternal Word interprets the former from the latter. The 
rabbins interpreted the Scriptures to accord with the traditions 
of the elders ; Jesus interpreted them to accord with the mind 
of God their author. Hence the characteristic authority with 
which He spake ; the freedom with which He added to the 
a^ncient Scriptures, and substituted a higher revelation for 
the lower, wherever it was found necessary. As Dorner appro- 
priately says : 

^^ This is the wondrous charm of His words, their unfathomable, 
mysterious depth, despite all their simplicity, that they are ever 
uttered, so to speak, from the heart of the question; for the har- 
mony which binds together and comprehends in one view the op- 
posite ends of things, is lovingly and consciously present to Him, 
since everything is related to His kingdom. Other words of men, 
this or that man might have spoken ; nay, most that is spoken or 
done by us is merely a continuation of others through us ; we are 
simply therein points of transmission for tradition. But the 
words which He drew from Avithin — these precious gems, which 
attest the presence of the Son of Man, who is the Son of God — 
have an originality of an unique order; they are His, because 
taken from that which is present in Him. In this sense. His 
prophetic activity is simply manifestation. Certainly, where in 
the accommodation of love He condescends to men in figurative 
speech, or in simple talk, intelligible even to children, or avails 
Himself of ordinary, especially Old Testament ideas, He there 
suppresses the rays of His originality. But when He does this, it 
is in order to fill the Old Testament husk or the types and forms 
taken from nature with the highest, the true contents." ^ 

Jesus does not lay down any principles of interpretation. 
But we may venture from the synthesis of His exegesis to state 
the three following principles : (1) He recognized that the words 
of Scripture are living words of God to man, bearing upon 
human conduct. They are to be interpreted by entering into 
living communion with the living God and from internal per- 
sonal relations to their author, and not by roundabout methods 
of traditional definition and illustrative legend. (2) The di- 
vine revelation was made on the principle of accommodation to 
the weakness, ignorance, and sinfulness of man, requiring no 
tern of Christian Doctrine, Vol. III. p. 389. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 443 

more than he was able to bear. The temporary provisions are 
to be eliminated from the eternal principles and the divine 
ideals. (3) The Scriptures are an organic whole, the Gospel 
of the Messiah is the fulfilment of the Old Testament, the 
Messiah and His kingdom the key to the whole. These were 
fruitful principles and ought to have guided the Church in all 
time and preserved it from manifold errors. 

The apostles and their disciples in the New Testament use 
the methods of the Lord Jesus rather than those of the men of 
their time. The New Testament writers differ among them- 
selves in the tendencies of their thought. St. Peter, St. James, 
St. Jude, St. Matthew, and St. Mark incline to use the Haggada 
method ; St. Stephen, St. Paul, and St. Luke to the more 
learned Halacha method; St. John and the Epistle to the 
Hebrews to the Sodh or allegorical method; but in them all, 
the methods of the Lord Jesus prevail over the other methods 
and ennoble them. 

1. The Haggada is used by St. Peter when he cites Scripture ^ 
with reference to the case of Judas. The propriety is in the 
parallelism of the cases of the doom of the traitor and persecutor. 
The Gospel ^ of Matthew makes similar uses of Holy Scripture 
and applies it to the situation of Jesus. ^ There is here a 
parallelism of circumstances, in which the ancient prophecies 
illustrate the descent of Jesus into Egypt and the lamentation 
at Bethlehem, by the descent of Israel into Egypt and the wars 
that desolated Judea. There is no prediction in these prophe- 
cies, or interpretation of them by the evangelist as prediction ; 
but the association of the passages with Jesus has its propriety 
in that He is conceived to be the Messiah, in whom the fortunes 
of Israel are involved. " Here is incorrectness of form with 
truth of thought."^ 

The Epistle of St. James ^ uses by j)ref erence what has been 
called the moral Haggada. To maintain his proposition that 
faith without works is dead, he cites the examples of Abraham 
and Rahab.^ So he refers to the patience of Job and the fervent 

1 Cf. Acts 120; Ps. 6925, iQQs. 2 Mt. 3i»-i8. 3 Hos. Ill . jer. 31i5. 

* Tholuck, Alt. Test, in iV. T., 6te Aufl., Gotha, 1868, p. 44. 
s Jas. 221 ««?■. 6 Gen. 22 : Jos. 2. 



444 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

prayers of Elijah. ^ St. Paul also uses the Haggada in his citation 
of Ps. 19^, to illustrate the going forth of the gospel to the ends 
of the earth,2 and of Deut. SQU*^^-, to illustrate the truth that 
the word of the gospel was nigh in the preaching of the 
apostles, in the faith of the heart, and in the confession of the 
mouth. ^ The Epistle to the Hebrews uses it especially in call- 
ing the roll of the heroes of faith.^ There are also a few ex- 
amples in the New Testament of the use of legends and fables ^ 
for purposes of illustration, which do not commit the authors to 
their historical truthfulness. 

2. The Halaclia method is used by St. Paul arguing from the 
less to the greater ; ^ from analogy ; "^ from general to partic- 
ular ; ^ from the combination of passages to prove the corruption 
of sin.^ 

The Halacha method is also used by St. James to prove his 
point that whoso transgresseth one of the laws is guilty of all,^^ 
by citing the general law,^^ and the special commands. ^^ 

3. The allegorical method is used by St. Paul, where Hagar 
and Sara are taken to represent the Pharisee and the Christian, ^^ 
and where he uses the water from the rock as an allegory of 
Christ. 1^ Here the apostle sees a principle clothed in the history. 
He uses it to illustrate and enforce an analogous case where 
the principle applies. As Tholuck says, " The apostle is like 
one who has seen a finished picture and then afterwards sees in 
the sketch of it more than we do who have only the sketch." ^^ 
Is it not rather with the sunlight of prophetic insight he sees 
into the essential features of the ancient histories, whereas to us 
they are in the obscurities of candlelight ? He tells us more 
about them than we can see even with his guidance. It is in 
the Epistle to the Hebrews that the allegorical method has its 
greatest display in the New Testament. St. Paul uses it occa- 
sionally, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews constantly. 
As Tholuck says, " The literary character of Paul is Talmudic 

1 Jas. 511-17. 2 Rom. IQis. 3 Kom. lO^-io. 

4 Heb. 11. 6 2 Pet. 2* *«?• ; Jude 9 seq. ; 2 Tim. S^. See p. 348. 

6 1 Cor. 99 ««3- ; Deut. 25*. ^ 2 Cor. 3' ; Ex. 241^, 342^35. 

8 Rom. 43«««- from Gen. 156, pg. 321-2 ; 1 Cor. 142i>'e?- from Is. 2811-12. 

9 Rom. 39-18 from Ps. 14i-3, 5^, 140^, 10" ; Is. 59''- « ; Ps. 36i. « Jas. 28-i3. 
11 Lev. I918. 12 Ex. 201^14, 13 Qal. 42* *«?-. i4 1 Cor. 10*. i^ In I.e., p. 37. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 445 

and dialectic, the Epistle to the Hebrews is Hellenistic and 
rhetorical."^ Thus the Sabbath of the Old Testament is used 
to allegorize the Sabbath rest^ at the end of the world. The 
person and office of Melchizedek are used to allegorize the Mes- 
sianic high-priest, and there is an allegory in the etymology of 
the names Salem and Melchizedek. ^ Here, according to Riehm, 
the author " leaves out of consideration the historical meaning 
of Old Testament passages, and only sees the higher prophetic 
meaning which belongs to them on account of their ideal 
contents."* 

The Apocalypse uses the allegorical method of symbolism in 
the number of the beast, 666^^ the sun-clad woman,^ the river 
Euphrates,^ the city of Babylon,^ the place Harmageddon,^ the 
prophetic numbers of Daniel ^^ and the recombination of ancient 
prophecies,^! and the descriptions of Paradise. ^^ 

There are many who in our times seek to explain away the 
allegorical interpretation, as used in the New Testament, as 
unbecoming to Jesus and His apostles. These forget that it 
was just this allegorical method, with all its abuses, that has 
been chiefly employed in the Synagogue and in the Church for 
ages by the ablest and most pious of her interpreters. Thus 
Bishop Lightfoot reproves such persons : ^^ 

" We need not fear to allow that Saint Paul's mode of teaching 
here is colored by his early education in the rabbinical schools. It 
were as unreasonable to stake the apostle's inspiration on the turn 
of a metaphor or the character of an illustration or the form of an 
argument, as on purity of diction. No one now thinks of main- 
taining that the language of the inspired writers reaches the clas- 
sical standard of correctness and elegance, though at one time it 
was held almost a heresy to deny this. ' A treasure contained in 
earthen vessels,' ^strength made perfect in weakness,' 'rudeness 
in speech, yet not in knowledge,' such is the far nobler conception 
of inspired teaching, which we may gather from the apostle's own 
language. And this language we should do well to bear in mind. 
But, on the other hand, it were sheer dogmatism to set up the 

1 In I.e., p. 52. 2 Heb. 4. 3 Heb. 7. 

* Lehrb. Hehrderhriefes, Neue Ausg., 1867, p. 204. ^ j^ev. 13i8. 

6 Rev. 12i*«?-. 7 Rev. 16i2. 8 Rev. 175, 182. 9 Rev. 16i6. 

10 Rev. 126, 135. 11 Rev. 21, 22 ; Ezek. 33-38; Dan. 79««?-, 12 ; Is. 258, 65i'««?-. 
12 Gen. 28««?-. i^ Saint Paul 's Epistle to the Galatians, Andover, 1870, p. 370. 



446 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

intellectual standard of our own age or country as an infallible 
rule. The power of allegory has been differently felt in different 
ages, as it is differently felt at any one time by diverse nations. 
Analog}^, allegory, metaphor — by what boundaries are these sepa- 
rated, the one from the other ? What is true or false, correct or 
incorrect, as an analogy, or an allegory ? What argumentative 
force must be assigned to either ? We should at least be prepared 
with an answer to these questions, before we venture to sit in 
judgment on any individual case." 

4. The apostles were taught by Jesus to consider the old 
covenant as a whole ; to see it as a shadow, type, and prepara- 
tory dispensation with reference to the new covenant ; to re- 
gard the substance and disregard the form. Hence under the 
further guidance of the Holy Spirit they eliminated the tem- 
poral, local, and circumstantial forms of the old covenant, and 
gained the universal, eternal, and essential substance ; and this 
they applied to the circumstances of the new covenant, of which 
they were called to be the expounders. They interpreted in 
accordance with the mind of the reigning Christ as Jesus had 
interpreted in accordance with the mind of His Father. 

Thus St. Peter on the day of Pentecost ^ grasps the situation 
and sees in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit the inauguration 
of the new dispensation described by the prophet Joel.^ In 
his epistle ^ he applies the Sinaitic covenant * to the new cove- 
nant relations. This was from the sense of the unity of both 
covenants in Christ, and the fulfilment of the earlier in the later. 
So St. Paul goes back of the law of Sinai to the Abrahamic 
covenant and finds that all believers are the true children of 
Abraham. ^ He represents the ancient institutions as '' a 
shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ's."^ 
And so the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews finds the en- 
tire system of Levitical priesthood, purification, and offerings 
fulfilled in Christ and His ministry, so that the form is thrown 
off now that the " very image " of these things has been made 
manifest. 7 The author of the Apocalypse gathers up the sub- 
stance of unfulfilled prophecy and attaches it to the second ad- 
vent of Jesus Christ. 

1 Acts 216*«?.. 2 Joel Slseq. (228 se?.). 3 1 Pet. 29««?-. * Ex. 19. 

5 Rom. 4. « Col. 2". 7 Heb. IQi*''?-. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 447 

This organic living method of interpretation of Jesus and 
His apostles is the true Christian method. The errors in the 
history of exegesis have sprung up to the right and the left of it. 

TV. Interpretation of the Fathers and Schoolmen 

In the ancient Church the methods of exegesis ^ of the Pales- 
tinian and Hellenistic Jews, as well as those of Jesus and His 
apostles, were reproduced. The strife of the various elements 
that entered into the apostolic Church is clearly to be seen in 
the New Testament itself. ^ 

The Palestinian methods were represented in the Ebionites 
and the Jewish-Christian tendency that passed over into the 
Church. Thus Papias, in his naive way, appeals to the elders, 
Aristion, the Presbyter John, and others, rather than to the 
New Testament, to establish his premillenarianism.^ The 
Clementine pseudepigraph represents the apostle Peter in con- 
flict with Simon Magus, as the embodiment of Church authority 
over against Gnosticism. St. Peter, speaking of the prophetic 
writings, is made to say : 

" Which things were indeed plainly spoken, but are not plainly 
written; so much so that when they are read they cannot be 
understood without an expounder, on account of the sin which 
has grown up with men." ^ 

TertuUian also says : 

" Our appeal, therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures ; 
nor must controversy be admitted on points in which victory will 
either be impossible, or uncertain, or not certain enough. . . . 
The natural order of things would require that this point should 
be first proposed, which is now the only one which we must dis- 
cuss : ' With whom lies that very faith to which the Scriptures 
belong ? From what, and through whom, and when, and to whom, 
has been handed down that rule, by which men become Christians ? ' 
For wherever it shall be manifest that the true Christian rule and 

1 For the history of exegesis in the Christian Church, see Rosenmtiller, 
Historia interpretationis lihrorum sacrorum in Ecclesia Christiana, 5 Tom., 
Hildburghusee, 1795-1814, but especially Klausen, Hermeneutik des Neuen 
Testaments^ Leipzig, 1841, and Samuel Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, Edin., 
1843 ; M. S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, 2d ed., 1885. 

2 Acts 15 ; 1 Cor. 3 ; Gal. 2 ; 1 Tim. 1 ; Jas. 2 ; Rev. 2. 

3 Eusebius, Eccl. Hist., HI. 39. * Becorjnitlons, I. Chap. XXI. 



448 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

faith shall be, there will likewise be the true Scriptures and expo- 
sitions thereof, and all the Christian traditions." ^ 

Iremeus ^ and Cyprian ^ laid stress upon the literal method 
of exegesis and the authority of tradition, and exercised an un- 
fortunate influence upon the early Latin Church. 

The Hellenistic methods found the greatest representation 
in the early Church. The New Testament writers employed 
the Greek language and the Septuagint version. It is probable 
that the great majority of the earliest Christians were Hellenists. 
Naturally the influence of Philo and the allegorical method 
became very great. We see that influence alread}^ in the 
Epistle to the Hebrews and the Johannine writings. We find it 
in the epistles of Clement of Rome and Barnabas, of the apos- 
tolic Fathers ; in Justin and the apologists generally.* Clement 
of Alexandria gave it more definite shape when he distin- 
guished between the body and soul of Scripture and called 
attention to its fourfold use. He compares it to engrafting : 
(1) The way in which we instruct plain people belonging to 
the Gentiles, who receive the word superficially ; (2) the 
instruction of those who have studied philosophy, cutting 
through the Greek dogmas and opening up the Hebrew Script- 
ures ; (3) overcoming the rustics and heretics by the force 
of the truth ; (4) the gnostic teaching, which is capable of 
looking into the things themselves.^ He makes the remark: 

" The truth is not to be found by changing the meanings, but 
in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the 
sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demou- 
strated in the Scriptures from similar Scriptures.'' ^ 

Klausen well says : 

^' By the assertion and vindication of this principle of interpre- 
tation the Alexandrian teachers have been the preservers of the 
pure Christian doctrine, when the crass literal interpretation in 
many parts of the Latin church, especially the African provinces, 
worked to justify from the sacred Scriptures the grossest ideas of 
the being of God, the nature of the soul, and the future life." '' 

1 Adv. Ilcer., Chap. XIX. * Klausen in I.e., pp. 97 seq. 

2 Adv. Hcer., I. Chap. IX. 4 ; Chap. X. 1. ^ Stromata, VI. 15. 

3 Epist. 74. 6 Stromata, VII. 16. 

7 In I.e., p. 103. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 449 

Origen carried out the principles of interpretation still 
further and became the father of the allegorical method in the 
Church. He distinguishes a threefold sense o- body, soul, and 
spirit.^ He uses thirteen of Philo's rules. ^ He lays stress on 
the allegory and often uses it to get rid of anthropomorphisms, 
and turns a good deal of ancient Jewish history into allegory ; 
but he does not neglect the literal sense. He uses the three 
senses, but ranges them in the order of ascent from lowest to 
highest, and finds in the spiritual sense the one chiefly de- 
sirable. 

Eucherius of Lyons in the first half of the fifth century ^ 
divides the mystical sense into two kinds, — the allegorical, 
what is to be believed in now ; the anagogical, what is pre- 
dicted.* In Hilary and Ambrose the allegorical method became 
dominant in the Latin Church. Ambrose says : 

" As the Church has two eyes with which it contemplates Christ ; 
namely, a moral and a mystic, of Avhich the former is sharper, the 
latter milder, so the entire divine Scripture is either natural, or 
moral or mystic." ^ 

Tychonius belonged to this school, and laid down seven rules 
of interpretation : (1) Of the Lord and His body; (2) the 
twofold division of the Lord's body ; (3) promises and law ; 
(4) relation of species and genus ; (5) the times ; (6) reca- 
pitulation ; (7) the devil and his body. These rules have more 
to do with the doctrinal substance of the Scriptures, the rela- 
tion of the Church to Christ, the Law to the Gospel, and the like. 
They have been of service in the history of the Church and are 
mentioned with approval by Augustine, although he shows 
their insufficiency.^ Augustine gave the allegorical method a 
better shaping in the Latin Church. He distinguishes four 
kinds of exegesis : (1) historical, (2) ^etiological,^ (3) ana- 
logical, (4) allegorical,^ and lays down the principle that what- 

1 Horn. V. in Lev. 2 Siegfried in Lc, pp. 353 seq. 

^ Liber formularum spiritualis intelligentice, Migne edition, Tom. 50, p. 727. 
SeeReuss, Gesch. d. Heil. Schrift. iY. T., 4te Ausg., Braunschweig, 1864, p. 543. 

* Kilin, Theodor von Mopsuestia und Junilius Africanus als JExegeten, 
Freib., 1880, p. 30. 

5 Exposit. in Ps. 118, Serm. ii., n. 7 ; ibid., 36, Pr(jef. 

^ Be doctrina^ III. 30, ^ An inquiry into the causes. ^ De util. cred. , Chap. V. 
2g 



450 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ever cannot be referred to good conduct or truth of faith must 
be regarded as figurative. ^ Klausen gives a careful summary of 
the exegetical principles of Augustine. These are reproduced 
by Davidson, from whom I quote ^ in a more condensed form : 

" (1) The object of all interpretation is to express as accurately 
as possible the thoughts and meaning of an author. ... (2) In 
the case of the Holy Scriptures, this is not attained by strictly 
insisting on each single expression by itself. ... (3) On the 
contrary, we should endeavor to clear up the obscurity of such 
passages, and to remove their ambiguity — first, by close attention 
to the connexion before and after ; next, by comparison with kin- 
dred places where the sense is more clearly and definitely given ; 
and lastly, by a reference to the essential contents of Christian 
doctrine. (4) The interpreter of Holy Scripture must bring with 
him a Christian reverence for the divine word, and an humble 
disposition which subordinates preconceived opinions to whatever 
it perceives to be contained in the Word of God. ... (5) Where 
the interpretation is insecure, notwithstanding the preceding meas- 
ures, it must be assumed, that the matter lies beyond the circle of 
the essential truths belonging to the Christian faith. (6) It is 
irrational and dangerous for any one, whilst trusting in faith, and 
in the promises respecting the operations of the Holy Spirit on 
the mind, to despise the guidance and aid of science in the inter- 
pretation of Scripture." 

The spirit that should actuate the interpreter is beautifully 
stated by Augustine : 

" The man who fears God seeks diligently in Holy Scripture for 
a knowledge of His will. And when he has become meek through 
piety, so as to have no love of strife, when furnished also with a 
knowledge of language so as not to be stopped by unknown words 
and forms of speech, and with the knowledge of certain necessary 
objects, so as not to be ignorant of the force and nature of those 
which are used figuratively ; and assisted, besides, by accuracy in 
the texts, which has been secured by skill and care in the matter 
of correction; — when thus prepared, let him proceed to the 
examination and solution of the ambiguities of Scripture."^ 

I think on the whole that Klausen is justified, so far as the 
Latin Church is concerned, in his statement that : 

1 De doctrina, III. 15. 

2 Klausen in I.e., pp. 162 seq. ; Davidson in Z.c, pp. 133 seq. 

3 De doctrina. III. 1. 



HISTOEY OE THE INTERPRETATION 451 

"None of the rest of the fathers, earlier or later, came near 
Augustine in the conception and statement of the essential charac- 
ter and conditions of the interpretation of Scripture. The truths 
which the Reformation in the sixteenth century again invoked 
into fruitful life, namely, of the relation of the sacred Scriptures 
to Christian doctrine, and of the scientific interpretation of the 
Scriptures, and which have become subsequently the foundations 
for the erection of evangelical dogmatics, may all be shown in the 
writings of Augustine, expressed in his clear, strong language." ^ 

This should, however, be qualified with the remark that 
Augustine's practice did not altogether accord with his pre- 
cepts. He was dominated by the rule of faith 2 and the 
authority of the Church, as Irenseus and TertuUian had been.^ 
Augustine, in his practice, used too much of the allegory ; and 
the Latin Fathers followed his example rather than his precepts, 
and more and more gave themselves up to this method. Greg- 
ory the Great went to the greatest lengths in allegory. 

Toward the close of the third century Lucius of Samosata 
established at Antioch a new exegetical school, which soon rose 
to a great power and influence, and produced the greatest exe- 
getes of the ancient Church. Its fundamental principles are 
well stated by Kihn.* (1) Every passage has its literal mean- 
ing, and only one meaning. We must, however, distinguish 
between plain and figurative language, and interpret each pas- 
sage in accordance with its nature. (2) Alongside of the literal 
sense is the typical sense, which arises out of the relation of the 
old covenant to the new. It is based upon the literal sense 
which it presupposes. These are sound principles and are in 
accord with the usage of the New Testament. 

"The Antiochans mediated between the two contrasted posi- 
tions : a coarse, childish, literal sense, and an arbitrary allegorical 
interpretation ; between the extremes of the Judaizers and Anthro- 
pomorphites on the one hand, and the Hellenistic Gnostics and 
Origenists on the other ; and they paved the way for a sound 

ilnLc, p. 165. 

2 Diestel, Gesch. d. Alt. Test, in d. Christ. Kirdie, Jena, 1869, p. 85 ; A. Dorner, 
Augustinus sein theologisches System., Berlin, 1873, pp. 240 seq. 

3 He did not apprehend the essential Protestant principle of interpretation, 
namely, the analogy of faith in the Scriptures themselves. 

4 i.e., p. 29. 



452 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

biblical exegesis which, remained influential for all coming time, if 
indeed not always prevalent.'^ ^ 

The ADtiochan school produced scholars of different ten- 
dencies. Some of them, like Theodore of Mopsuestia, Diodorus 
of Tarsus, and Nestorius, pressed historical and grammatical 
exegesis too far, to the neglect of the higher typical and mysti- 
cal ; but in Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Ephraem the Syrian, 
the principles of the school find expression in the noblest prod- 
ucts of Christian exegesis, which served as the reservoir of 
supply for the feeble traditionalists of the Middle Ages, and are 
valued more and more in our own times. ^ 

With the decline of the school of Antioch, its principles were 
maintained at Edessa and Nisibis, and thence gave an impulse 
to the Arabs and the Jewish exegesis of the Middle Ages ; and 
thus in a roundabout way again influenced the Church of the 
West at the Reformation. But an earlier influence may be 
traced in the reproduction of the work of Paul of Nisibis by 
Junilius Africanus in his Institutes.'^ The rules of Junilius are 
brief but excellent : 

" {Disciple.) What are those things which we ought to guard in 
the understanding of the sacred Scriptures ? {Master.) That those 
things which are said may agree with Hinr who says them ; that 
they should not be discrepant with the reasons for which they 
were said ; that they should accord with their times, places, order, 
and intention. {Disciple.) How may we learn the intention of the 
divine doctrine ? {Master). As the Lord Himself says, that we 
should love God with all our hearts and with all our souls, and 
our neighbors as ourselves. But corruption of doctrine is, on the 
contrary, not to love God or the neighbor." ^ 

The school of Nisibis influenced the Occident also through 
Cassiodorus, Avho wished to establish a corresponding theologi- 
cal school at Rome, but failed on account of the warlike times. ^ 
If this had been accomplished, the history of the Middle Ages 
might have been very different. Pie introduced the methods 
of the school of Nisibis in his Institutions. This was an impor- 
tant text-book in the Middle Ages and exerted a healthful influ- 

1 X.c, p. 29. 3 instituta Begidaria DivincB Legis. 

2 Diestel in I.e., pp. 135, 138. ^ Kihn in I.e., p. 526. 

° Kihn in I.e., p. 210. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 453 

ence. He urges the use of the Fathers as a Jacob's ladder by 
which to rise to the Scriptures themselves. He insists upon 
the comparison of Scripture with Scriptures, and points out 
that frequent and intense meditation is the way to a true under- 
standing of them.i 

Jerome seems to have occupied an intermediate and not alto- 
gether consistent position. He strives for historical and gram- 
matical exposition, yet it is easy to see that at the bottom he is 
more inclined to the allegorical method. He lays down no 
principles of exegesis, but scattered through his writings one 
finds numerous wise remarks : 

" The sacred Scripture cannot contradict itself." ^ " Whoever 
interprets the gospel in a different spirit from that in which it was 
written, confuses the faithful and distorts the gospel of Christ." ^ 
"The gospel consists not in the words of Scripture but in tlie 
sense, not in the surface but in the marrow, not in the leaves of 
the words but in the roots of the thought."* 

Thus there grew up in the ancient Church three great exe- 
getical tendencies : the literal and traditional, the allegorical 
and mystical, the historical and ethical, and these three strug- 
gled with one another and became more and more interwoven, 
in the best of the Fathers, but took on all sorts of abnormal 
forms of exegesis in others. 

In the Middle Ages the vital Christian spirit was more and 
more suppressed, and ecclesiastical authority assumed the place 
of learning. The traditional principle of exegesis became more 
and more dominant, and alongside of this the allegorical method 
was found to be the most convenient for reconciling Scripture 
with tradition. The literal and the historical sense was almost 
entirely ignored. The fourfold sense became fixed, as expressed 
in the saying : the literal sense teaches what has been done, the 
allegorical what to believe, the moral what to do, the anagogical 
whither we are tending.^ 

In the Middle Ages exegesis consisted chiefly in the reproduc- 

i Kihn inZ.c.,pp. 211, 212 ; Proef. de Instit. div. litt., Migne, Tom. 70, p. 1105 
seq. 

2 Epist. ad Marcellam. ^ Epist. ad Gal., i. 6. * Epist. ad Gal., i. 11. 

^ Litera gesta docet, quid credas allegoria, moralis quid agas, quo tendas 
Anagogia. 



454 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

tion of the expositions of the Fathers, in collections and compila- 
tions, called epitomes, glosses, postilles, chains. In the Oriental 
Church the chief of these compilers were : Oecumenius (f 999), 
Theophylact (flOOT), and Euthymius Zigabenus (flll8). 
These give chiefly the ex*egesis of Chrysostom, Theodoret, 
and the Antiochan school. In the Occidental Church, there 
is more independence and greater use of the allegory. The 
chief Latin expositors of the Middle Ages are Beda (fTSS) : Al- 
cuin (t804), Walafrid Strabo (t849), Rhabanus Maurus (1856), 
Peter Lombard (tll64), Thomas Aquinas (tl274),i Hugo de 
St. Caro (fl260). The only exegete of the Middle Ages who 
shows any acquaintance with the Hebrew text of the Old Testa- 
ment is the converted Jew, Nicolaus de Lyra (f 1340). He seems 
to have apprehended better than any previous writer the proper 
exegetical method, but could only partly put it in practice. He 
was doubtless influenced greatly by the grammatical exegesis of 
the Jews of the Middle Ages, from Saadia's school, and especially 
by Rashi.2 He wrote postilles on the entire Bible. He men- 
tions the four senses of Scripture, and then says : 

"All of them presuppose the literal sense as the foundation. 
As a building, declining from the foundation, is likely to fall, so 
the mystic exposition, which deviates from the literal sense, must 
be reckoned unbecoming and unsuitable." 

And yet he adds : 

" I protest, I intend to say nothing either in the way of assertion 
or determination, except in relation to such things as have been 
clearly settled by Holy Scripture on the authority of the Church. 
All besides must be taken as spoken scholastically and by way of 
exercise ; for which reason, I submit all I have said, and aim to 
say, to the correction of our holy mother the Church." ^ 

It is astonishing that he accomplished so much while work- 
ing in such limits. He exerted a healthful, reviving influ- 

1 His Catena Aurea on the Gospels have been translated by Pusey, Keble, 
and Newman, 6 vols., Oxford, 1870, and may be consulted as the most accessible 
specimen of the interpretation of the Middle Ages. 

=2 See Siegfried, " Raschi's Einflass auf Nicolaus von Lira und Luther in der 
Anslegung der Genesis," in Merx, Archiv, I. pp. 428 seq. ; II. pp. 39 seq. 

3 Fostillce perpetuoe^ sen hrevia commenCana in Universa Biblia^ prol. ii. ; 
Davidson in I.e., pp. 175 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 455 

ence in biblical study and in a measure prepared for the 
Reformation. There is truth in the saying, " If Lyra had not 
piped, Luther would not have danced." ^ Luther thought 
highly of Lyra, and yet Luther really started from a principle 
entirely different from the literal sense. For this he was rather 
prepared by Wicklif and Huss. Wicklif was a contemporary 
of Lyra, and opposed the abuse of the allegorical method from 
the spiritual side, and in contrast with Lyra recognized the au- 
thority of the Scriptures as above the authority of the Church. 
He makes the all-important statement, which was not allowed 
to die, but became the Puritan watchword in subsequent times : 
" The Holy Spirit teaches us the sense of Scripture as Christ 
opened the Scriptures to His apostles." ^ Huss and Jerome of 
Prague followed Wicklif in this respect.^ 

With reference to the interpretation of the Middle Ages as a 
whole, the remarks of Lnmer are appropriate : * 

" It lacks the most essential qualification to scriptural interpre- 
tation, linguistic knowledge, and historical perception. ... This 
defect inheres in the mediaeval period in general. Hence there 
could be no advance in interpretation. But what it could do it 
did: it collected and preserved; and what was thus preserved 
waited for new fructifying elements, which were to be introduced 
in the second half of the fifteenth century." 

The mediaeval exegesis reached its culmination at the Council 
of Trent, where Roman Catholic interpretation was limited by 
the four rules : that it must be conformed to the rule of faith, 
the mind of the Church, the consent of the Fathers, and the 
decisions of the councils. But the seeds of a new exegesis had 
been planted by Lyra and Wicklif, which burst forth into fruit- 
ful life in the Protestant Reformation. 

1 Si Lyra non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset. 

2 Lechler, Johann von Wiclif , Leipzig, 1873, I. pp. 483 seq. ; Lorimer's edi- 
tion, London, 1878, 11. pp. 29 seq. 

3 Gillett, Life and Times of John HusSf Boston, 1864, 2d ed., I. pp. 296 seq. 
* Immer, Z.c, p. 37. 



456 STUDY or holy scripture 

V. The Interpretation of the Reformers and their 

Successors 

The Reformation was accompanied by a great revival of 
biblical study in all directions, but especially in the interpre- 
tation of the Sacred Scriptures. The Humanists were influ- 
enced, by their studies of the Greek and Hebrew languages 
and literatures, to apply this new learning to the study of the 
Bible. Erasmus is the acknowledged chief of interpreters of 
this class. He insisted that the interpretation of the Script- 
ures should be in accordance with the original Greek and 
Hebrew texts, and urged the giving of the grammatical and 
literal sense over against the allegorical sense, which had been 
the ally of tradition.^ The Humanists, however, did not go to 
the root of the evil ; they were too deferential to ecclesiastical 
authorities, and sought to correct the errors in exegesis by 
purely scholarly methods. The Reformers, however, revived 
the principle of Wicklif and Huss, strengthened it, and made it 
invincible. They urged the one literal sense against the four- 
fold sense, but they still more insisted that Scripture should be 
its own interpreter, and that it was not to be interpreted by 
tradition or external ecclesiastical authority. Thus, Luther 
says : 

" Every word should be allowed to stand in its natural meaning 
and that should not be abandoned unless faith forces us to 
it.^ ... It is the attribute of Holy Scriptm-e that it interprets 
itself by passages and places which belong together, and can only 
be understood by the rule of faith." ^ 

Tyndale says : 

" Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the Scripture hath but 
one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the 
root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, where- 
unto if thou cleave, thou canst never err or go out of the way. 
And if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst not but go out of 
the way. Neverthelater, the Scripture useth proverbs, similitudes, 
riddles, or allegories, as all other speeches do ; but that which the 
proverb, similitude, riddle, or allegory signifieth, is ever the literal 

1 Klausen in I.e., p. 227. - Walch edition, XIX. p. 1601. 

3 Walch, III. p. 2042. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 457 

sense, wMcli thou must seek out diligently : as in the English we 
borrow words and sentences of one thing, and apply them unto 
another, and give them new significations. . . . Beyond all this, 
when we have found out the literal sense of the Scripture by the 
process of the text, or by a like text of another place, then go we ; 
and as the Scripture borroweth similitudes of worldly things, even 
so we again borrow similitudes or allegories of the Scripture, and 
apply them to our purposes ; which allegories are no sense of the 
Scripture, but free things besides the Scripture, and altogether in 
the liberty of the Spirit. . . . Finally, all God's words are spirit- 
ual, if thou have eyes of God, to see the right meaning of the 
text, and whereunto the Scripture pertaineth, and the final end 
and cause thereof." ^ 

The view of the Reformed Churches is expressed in the 2d 
Helvetic Confession : ^ 

" We acknowledge that interpretation of Scripture for authen- 
tical and proper, which being taken from the Scriptures them- 
selves (that is, from the phrase of that tongue in which they were 
written, they being also wayed according to the circumstances and 
expounded according to the proportion of places, either like or 
unlike, or of more and plainer), accordeth with the rule of faith 
and charity, and maketh notably for God's glory and man's 
salvation." ^ 

The Protestant Reformers by the use of these principles pro- 
duced masterpieces of exegesis and set the Bible in a new light 
before the world. Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin were great 
exegetes; * Bullinger (f 1575), Oecolampadius (f 1531), Melanch- 
thon (f 1560), Musculus (f 1563), were worthy to stand by their 
side. Their immediate successors had somewhat of their spirit, 
although the sectarian element already influenced them in the 
maintenance of the peculiarities of the different national 
Churches. The Hermeneutical principles of the Lutherans are 
well stated by Matthias Flacius,^ those of the Reformed by Andre 
Rivetus.^ The weakness of the Protestant principle was in the 

1 The Obedience of a Christian Man^ 1528 ; Parker edition, Doctrinal 
Treatises, pp. 307 seq. 2 21. 

3 I give the English version from the Harmony of the Confessions, London, 
1643, on account of its historical relations. 

* Klausen in I.e., p. 223 ; also, p. 112. 

'" Clavis Scripturoe Sacroe, Antwerp, 1567 ; Basilese, 1609. Best edition, ed. 
Musaeus, 1675. ^ Isagoge, 1627. 



458 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

lack of clear definition of what was meant by the analogy or 
rule of faith. It is clear that the Protestant Reformers set the 
rule of faith in the Scriptures themselves, — in the substance 
of doctrine apprehended by faith. But when it came to define 
what that substance was, there was difiiculty. Hence, so soon 
as the faith of the Church was expressed in symbols, these were 
at first unconsciously, and at last avowedly, identified with the 
rule of faith in Holy Scripture itself. The Lutheran scholastic, 
Gerhard, says : 

" From these plain passages of Scripture the rule of faith is 
collected, which is the sum of the celestial doctrine collected from 
the most evident passages of Scripture. Its parts are two — the 
former concerning faith, whose chief precepts are expressed in 
the apostles' creed ; the latter concerning love, the sum of which 
the decalogue explains." ^ 

Hollazius^ defines the analogy of faith as "the funda- 
mental articles of faith, or the principal chapters of the Chris- 
tian faith, collected from the clearest testimonies of the 
Scriptures." Carpzov^ makes it "the system of Scripture 
doctrine in its order and connection." 

If this system of doctrine had been that found in the 
Scriptures themselves, in accordance with the modern discipline 
of Biblical Theology,* there would have been some propriety in 
the definition ; but inasmuch as the scholastic theologians pro- 
posed to express that system of doctrine in their theological 
commonplaces, in other methods and forms than those presented 
in the Scriptures, the rule of analogy of faith became practically 
these theological systems ; and so an external rule was substi- 
tuted for the internal rule of the Scriptures themselves, the 
Reformation principle was more and more abandoned, and the 
Jewish Halacha and the mediseval scholasticism reentered and 
took possession of Protestant exegesis.^ 

The Reformed Church was slower in attaining this result than 
the Lutheran Church, owing to the exegetical spirit that had 
come down from Oecolampadius, Calvin, and Zwingli ; but 

1 Gerhard, Loci, Tubingse, 1767, Tom. I. p. 53. 

2 Exam. Theologici Acroamatici, 1741, Holmige, p. 1777. 

3 Primce LincB Herm., Helmstad., 1790, p. 28. * See Chap. XXIII. 
5 Volck, in Zockler, Handb. Theo. Wiss., p. 657 ; Klausen in I.e., p. 254. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 459 

already Beza leads off in the wrong direction ; and, notwith- 
standing the great stress laid upon literal and grammatical 
exegesis by Cappellus and the school of Saumur in France, by 
Drusius, De Dieu, and Daniel Heinsius in Holland, the drift 
was in the scholastic direction, and when the Swiss churches 
arrayed themselves against the French exegetes, and the 
churches of Holland were divided by the Arminian controversy, 
and the historical and literal exegesis came to characterize the 
latter, the scholastic divines more and more employed the 
dogmatic method, and urged to interpret in accordance with 
the external rule of faith. 

VI. The Interpretation" of the Puritans and the 

Arminians 

British Puritanism remained true to the Protestant principle 
of interpretation till the close of the seventeenth century. The 
views of Tyndale and the Puritans went deeper into the essence 
of the matter than those of the continental Reformers. This 
was doubtless owing to the fact of their conflict against eccle- 
siastical authority and the prelatical party, and their protests 
against " the obtrusion of Popish ceremonies " on the Chris- 
tians of England. They urged more and more the principle 
of the Scripture alone as the rule of the Church, and insisted 
on the jus divinum^ the Divine authority of Holy Scripture as 
the supreme appeal. Thus Thomas Cartwright : 

"Scripture alone being able and sufficient to make us wise to 
salvation, we need no unwritten verities, no traditions of men, no 
canons of coimcels, or sentences of fathers, much less decrees of 
popes, to supply any supposed defect of the written word, or to 
give us a more perfect direction in the way of life, then is already 
set down expressly in the canonicall Scriptures. . , . They are 
of divine authority. They are the rule, the line, the squyre and 
light, whereby to examine and trie all judgements and sayings of 
men, and of angels, whether they be such as God approveth, yea 
or no ; and they are not to be judged or sentenced by any." ^ 

Especially noteworthy is the statement that no external rule 
is to be used to supply any supposed defects of the written 

1 Treatise of Christian Eeligion, 1616, p. 78. 



460 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

word, and that plain direction is given by what is set down 
expressly in the Scripture. John Ball gives an admirable state- 
ment of the Puritan position : 

" The expounding of the Scriptures is commanded by God, and 
practiced by the godly, profitable both for the unfolding of obscure 
places, and applying of plaine texts. It stands in two things. 
(1) In giving the right sense. (2) In a fit application of the 
same. Of one place of Scripture, there is but one proper and 
naturall sense, though sometimes things are so expressed, as that 
the things themselves doe signifie other things, according to the 
Lord's ordinance: Gal. 4:''-''; Ex. 12^^ with John 19-^«; Ps. 2\ with 
Acts 4:^^-^. We are not tyed to the expositions of the Pathers or 
councels for the finding out the sense of the Scripture, the Holy 
Ghost speaking in the Scripture, is the only faithful interpreter 
of the Scripture. The meanes to find out the true meaning of the 
Scripture, are conference of one place of Scripture with another, 
diligent consideration of the scope and circumstances of the place, 
as the occasions, and coherence of that which went before, with 
that which followeth after; the matter whereof it doth intreat, 
and circumstances of persons, times and places, and consideration, 
whether the words are spoken figuratively or simply ; for in figu- 
rative speeches, not the outward shew of words, but the sense is 
to be taken, and knowledge of the arts and tongues wherein the 
Scriptures were originally written. But alwayes it is to bee ob- 
served, that obscure places are not to bee expounded contrary to 
the rule of faith set downe in plainer places of the Scripture." ^ 

The analogy or rule of faith is expressly defined by him as 
"set downe in plainer places of the Scripture," and it is main- 
tained that " the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture is the 
only faithful interpreter of the Scripture." This improvement 
of the Protestant principle, by lifting it to the person of the 
Holy Spirit speaking in the word to the believer, prevents any 
substitution of an external symbol or system of theology for 
the rule of faith of the Scriptures themselves. Archbishop 
Usher takes the same position as Ball : 

" The Spirit of God alone is the certain interpreter of His word 
written by His Spirit. Por no man knoweth the things pertaining 
to God, but the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2"). . . . The interpretation 
therefore must be of the same Spirit by which the Scripture was 

1 Short Treatise containing all the principall Grounds of Christian Heligion, 
Tenth Impression. London, 1635, p. 39. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 461 

written; of wliich Spirit we have no certainty upon any man's 
credit, but onely so far forth as his saying may be confirmed by 
the Holy Scriptures. . . . How then is the Scripture to be inter- 
preted by Scripture ^ According to the analogy of faith (Eom. 12*^), 
and the scope and circumstance of the present place, and confer- 
ence of other plain and evident places, by which all such as are 
obscure and hard to be understood ought to be interpreted, for 
there is no matter necessary to eternal life, which is not plainly, 
and sufficiently set forth in many places of Scripture." ^ 

These extracts from the Puritan Fathers, who chiefly influ- 
enced the Westminster divines, will enable us to understand 
the principles of interpretation laid down in the Westminster 
Confession, which are in advance of all the symbols of the 
Reformation in this particular : 

" The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Script- 
ure itself ; and therefore, when there is a question about the true 
and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), 
it must be searched and known by other places that speak more 
clearly." 

"The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are 
to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient 
writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits are to be examined, 
and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the 
Holy Spirit, speaking in the Scripture." ^ 

These principles of interpretation give the death-blow to the 
manifold sense, and also to any external analogy of faith for 
the interpretation of Scripture. It has been made contra-con- 
fessional in those churches which adopt the Westminster sym- 
bols to believe and teach any but the one true and full sense of 
any Scripture, or to appeal to " doctrines of men," or any 
external rule or analogy of faith, or to make any other but the 
Holy Spirit Himself the supreme interpreter of Scripture to the 
believer and the Church. It was not without good and suffi- 
cient reasons that the Westminster divines substituted the 
" Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture " for the analogy of 
faith which had been so much abused, and which was to be 
still more abused by the descendants of the Puritans, after they 

1 Body of Bivinitie, London, 1645 ; 4th ed., London, 1653, pp. 24, 25. 

2 19-10, 



462 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

had forgotten their Puritan Fathers, and resorted to the Swiss 
and Dutch scholastics for theological instruction. 

Edward Leigh clearly states the Puritan position in his chap- 
ter on the Interpretation of Scripture : 

" The Holy Ghost is the judge, and the Scripture is the sentence 
or definite decree. We acknowledge no publick judge except the 
Scripture, and the Holy Ghost teaching us in the Scripture, He 
that made the law should interpret the same. . . . The Papist 
says that the Scripture ought to be expounded by the rule of 
faith, and therefore not by Scripture only. But the rule of faith 
and Scripture is all one. As the Scriptures are not of man, but 
of the Spirit, so this interpretation is not by man, but of the Spirit 
likewise." ^ 

I shall call attention to some other features of the interpre- 
tation of the seventeenth century in England, because it has 
been neglected by British and American scholars, and conse- 
quently also by German critics and historians, upon whom most 
of our modern Anglo-Saxon interpreters depend. 

Henry Ainsworth says : 

"I have chiefly laboured in these annotations upon Moses, to 
explain his words and speech by conference with himself, and 
other prophets and apostles, all which are commenters upon his 
lawes, and do open unto us the mysteries which were covered 
under his veile ; for by a true and sound literall explication, the 
spiritual meaning may be the better discerned. And the exquisite 
scanning of words and phrases, which to some may seeme need- 
lesse, will be found (as painful to the writer) profitable to the 
reader." ^ 

Francis Taylor, a Westminster divine, a great Hebrew 
scholar and Talmudist, author of many commentaries and 
other practical and theological works, says : 

"The method used by me is new, and never formerly exactly 
followed in every verse, by any writer, Protestant or Papist, that 

1 Systeme or Body of Divinity^ London, 1654, pp. 107, 119. Leigh was a 
lawyer and a member of the Long Parliament, and is said to have been a lay 
member of the Westminster Assembly. Thomas Watson, in his Body of Prac- 
tical Divinity, in exposition of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, London, 
1692, p. 16, takes the same position : " The Scripture is to be its own interpreter, 
or rather the Spirit speaking in it ; nothing can cut the diamond but the dia- 
mond ; nothing can interpret Scripture but Scripture ; the sun best discovers 
itself by its own beams." ^ Pentateuch^ Preface, 1626. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 463 

ever I read. (1) Ye have the grammatical sense in the various 
significations of every Hebrew word used throughout the Old Tes- 
tament, which gives light to many other texts ; (2) Ye have the 
rhetorical sense, in the tropes and figures ; (3) The logicall, in the 
several arguments ; (4) The theological in divine observations." ^ 

This is an exact and admirable method, which would have 
delighted Ernesti in the next century, if he had known of it, 
with the exception of the last point in which the Puritan prac- 
tical interpretation comes in play. Edward Leigh ^ also lays 
down excellent principles : 

" The word is interpreted aright, by declaring (1) the order, 

(2) the summe or scope, (3) the sense of the words, which is done 
by framing a rhetorical and logical analysis of the text. In giv- 
ing the sense, three rules are of principal use and necessity to 
be observed. (1) The literal and largest sense of any words in 
Scripture must not be embraced further when our cleaving thereto 
would breed some disagreement and contrariety between the pres- 
ent Scripture and some other text or place, else shall we change the 
Scripture into a nose of wax. (2) In case of such appearing disa- 
greement, the Holy Ghost leads us by the hand to seek out some 
distinction, restriction, limitation or signe for the reconcilement 
thereof, and one of these will always fit the purpose ; for God's 
word must always bring perfect truth, it cannot fight against itself. 

(3) Such figurative sense, limitation, restriction or distinction must 
be sought out, as the word of God affordeth either in the present 
place or some other ; and chiefly those that seem to differ with the 
present text, being duly compared together." 

I do not know where a more careful statement of this deli- 
cate problem of harmonizing Scripture with Scripture can be 
found. 2 

1 Epist. dedicatory to the Exposition of the Proverbs, London, 1655. 

^ In I.e., p. 119. 

^ This same Edward Leigh was one of the best biblical scholars of the seven- 
teenth century. He published Annotations upon all the New Testament, phil- 
logicall and theologicall wherein the emphasis and elegance of the Greeke is 
observed, some imperfections in our translation are discovered, divers Jewish 
rites and customes tending to illustrate the text are mentioned, many antilogies 
and seeming contradictions reconciled, severall darke and obscure places opened, 
sundry passages vindicated from the false glosses of Papists and Heretics, Lon- 
don, 1650, folio. The title is descriptive of a sound method. He also published 
Critica Sacra on the Hebrew of the Old Testament, 4to, London, 1639 ; Critica 
Sacra on the Greek of the New Testament, 4to, London, 1646. These were 



464 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Puritan interpreters laid stress upon the practical inter- 
pretation or application of Scripture. The best statement is 
given by Francis Roberts.^ 

" That the Holy Scriptures may be more profitably and clearly 
understood, certain rules or directions are to be observed and 
followed : 

'' I. Some more special and peculiar, more particularly concern- 
ing scholars. As (1) The competent understanding of the original 
languages. ... (2) The prudent use of Logick. ... (3) The 
subservient help of other arts, as E/hetoric, Natural Philosophy, 
etc. ... (4) The benefit of humane histories to illustrate and 
clear the theme. (5) The conferring of ancient translations with 
the originals. ... (6) The prudent use of the most orthodox, 
learned, and judicious Commentators. (7) Constant caution that 
all tongues, arts, histories, translations, and comments be duly 
ranked in their proper places in subserviency under, not in regency 
or predominancy over the Holy Scriptures which are to controle 
them all. 

" II. Some more general and common directions, which may be of 
use to all sorts of Christians learned and unlearned. ... (1) Beg 
wisdom of the onely wise God, who gives liberally and upbraids 
not. ... (2) . Labour sincerely after a truly gracious spirit, then 
thou shalt be peculiarly able to penetrate into the internal marrow 
and mysteries of the holy Scriptures. ... (3) Peruse the Script- 
ure with an humble self-denying heart. . . . (4) Familiarize 
the Scripture to thyself by constant and methodical exercise 
therein. ... (5) Understand Scripture according to the theo- 
logical analogy, or certain rule of faith and love. ... (6) Be 
well acquainted with the order, titles, times, penman, occasion, 
scope, and principal parts of the books, both of the Old and ]*^ew 
Testament. (7) Heedfully and judiciously observe the accurate 
concord and harmony of the Holy Scriptures. (8) Learn the 
excellent art of explaining and understanding the Scriptures, by 
the Scriptures. (9) Endeavor sincerely to practice Scripture, and 
you shall solidly understand Scripture." 

I have given these rules at length, both on account of their 
intrinsic excellence and also to call attention to a work of great 

combined in a folio, 1662. They were translated into Latin by Henry Middoch 
and published at Amsterdam, 1679, and then at Leipzig, 1696, with preface by 
John Meyer, a Hebrew professor there, and in this way exerted a great influence 
on the continent until the close of the century. 

1 Key of the Bible, 4th ed., London, 1075, pp. 5 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE INTEEPRETATION 465 

value which has been lost sight of for a long time in the his- 
tory of interpretation. 

The same Francis Roberts ^ is the author of a massive work 
in two folio volumes, which construct a system of theology on 
the doctrine of the covenants. ^ 

In his epistolary introduction he says : " I began my weekly 
lectures, to treat of God's Covenants, on Sept. 2, 1651, and 
have persisted therein till the very publication of this book, in 
May, 1657." 

In the same introduction he describes his treatise as — 

" A Work of vast extent, comprising in it : all the methods of 
divine dispensations to the Church in all ages; all the conditions 
of the Church under those dispensations ; all the greatest and 
precious promises, of the life that now is, and of that which is to 
come; all sorts of blessings promised by God to man; all sorts 
of duties repromised by man to God ; all the gradual discoveries 
of Jesus Christ, the only Mediator and Saviour of sinners; the 
whole mystery of all true religion from the beginning to the end 
of the world ; and which as a continued thred of gold runs through 
the whole series of all the Holy Scriptures, . . . because I have 
set my heart exceedingly to the Covenants of my God, which (in 
my judgment) are an universal basis or foundation of all true 
religion and happiness, I have shunned no diligence, industry, or 
endeavor that to me seemed requisite for the profitable unveiling 
of them." 

Francis Roberts in this work carries out a plan devised and 
partially executed by John Ball.^ According to Thomas Blake,* 
''his purpose was to speak on this subject of the covenant, all 
that he had to say in all the whole body of divinity. That 
which he hath left behind gives us a taste of it." In this, Ball 
anticipated Cocceius and the Dutch Federal theology, as indeed 

1 He was a Presbyterian minister in London during the Commonwealth period, 
but at the Kestoration remained in the Church of England. 

2 The Mysterie and Marrow of the Bible : viz., God''s Covenants loith man, in 
the first Adam, before the Fall; and in the last Adam, Jesus Christ, after the 
Fall ; from the Beginning to the End of the World; Unfolded and Illustrated 
in positive Aphorisms and their Explanations. 2 vols,, London, 1657. 

2 Treatise of the Covenant of Grace, London, 1645, 4to, published after his 
death by his friend Simeon Ashe, and with commendatory notices by five other 
Westminster divines. 

* Treatise of the Covenant of God entered with mankinds in the several kindes 
and degrees of it. Preface, London, 1653. 
2h 



466 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTUKE 

liis system of the covenants is of a purer type, having all the 
advantages of the historical method of the Dutch Federal 
school without its far-fetched typologies. Indeed the theology 
of the covenants had been embedded in Puritan theology since 
Thomas Cartwright.^ The covenant principle is also in Usher's 
Body of Divinity, and the Westminster symbols. In truth, 
the historical principle that characterizes the covenant theol- 
ogy is better wrought out by John Ball and Francis Roberts 
than by Cocceius. It will be found that the doctrine of the 
covenants passed over from England with the Puritan spirit 
into the Federal school of Holland, and thence into Spener and 
the German Pietists. The essential mystic spirit is common 
to these three great movements, which were the historic succes- 
sors of one another in the order, England, Holland, Germany, 
although each assumed a form adapted to its peculiar circum- 
stances and conditions.^ 

The Federal school in Holland was characterized by a ten- 
dency to allegorize, which was foreign to the best Puritan 
type, although Thomas Brightman, in his commentaries on 
Revelation, Song of Songs, and Daniel, reintroduced the alle- 
gorical method into the Protestant Church and carried it to 
great lengths. He had not a few followers in Great Britain, 
and on the continent, where his works were republished. 

This element is united with the principle of the covenant in 
the Federal theology, and proved its greatest weakness. The 
Federal theology, however, exerted a wholesome influence in 
preserving the mystic spirit of interpretation over against the 
purely external historical method of the Arminians, and in main- 
taining the historic method of divine revelation over against the 
external and mechanical systematizing of the Dutch scholastics. 
Spener and the German Pietists also represented the mystic 
spirit of interpretation and adopted many of the chief features 
of Puritanism. They laid stress upon personal relations to 

1 In his Treatise of Christian Beligion, 1616, lie treats first of the doctrine of 
God and then of man ; next of the Word of God, and this he divides into two 
parts : the doctrine of the Covenant of Works, called the Law, the Covenant of 
Grace, the Gospel ; and treats of Christology and Soteriology under the latter. 

2 Cocceius was a pupil of Ames, the British Puritan. See Mitchell, Westmin- 
ster Assembly, London, 1883, pp. 344 seq. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 467 

God and experimental piety in order to the interpretation of 
Scripture. This was accompanied among the best of them with 
true scholarship. The Pietistic interpretation may be found 
stated by Franke,^ but especially by Rambach,^ whose work 
was fruitful for many generations and still retains its value. 
The best exegete in this direction is the celebrated Beugel, 
whose interpretation is a model of piety and accuracy.^ His 
principle of interpretation is briefly stated : " It is the especial 
office of every interpretation to exhibit adequately the force 
and significance of the words which the text contains, so as to 
express everything which the author intended, and to introduce 
nothing which he did not intend." ^ 

The principles of interpretation of the Puritans worked 
mightily during the seventeenth century in Great Britain, and 
produced exegetical works that ought to be the pride of the 
Anglo-Saxon churches in all time. Thomas Cartwright, Henry 
Ainsworth, John Reynolds, John Fox, Nicholas Byfield, Paul 
Bayne, Hugh Broughton, J. Davenant, Francis Taylor, Wil- 
liam Gouge, John Lightfoot, Edward Leigh, William Attersol, 
Thomas Gataker, Joseph Caryl, Samuel Clapp, John Trapp, 
William Greenhill, Francis Roberts, and numerous others have 
opened up the meaning of the Word of God for all generations. 
Among the last of the Puritan works on the more learned side 
was the masterpiece ^ of Matthew Poole ; but the more practi- 
cal side of interpretation continued to advance, until it attained 
its highest mark in Matthew Henry. ^ Other practical com- 
mentaries have been of great service to the churches, such as 
those of Philip Doddridge ^ and Thomas Scott,^ but the Puritan 
interpretation soon lost its strength by the neglect of the non- 
conformists to give their young men a thoroughly English 
Puritan theological education. Excluded from the English 

1 Manducatio ad lectionem, S.S., 1693; Prcelectiones Hermeneut., 1717. 

2 Institutiones Hei^meneuticoe, 1723, 8tb ed., Jense, 1764, ed, Buddeus. 

3 Gnomon N. T., Tiibingen, 1742, English edition by T. Carlton Lewis and 
Marvin R. Vincent, Philadelphia, 1860-1862. 

* Preface, xiv. 

^ Synopsis Criticorum, 5 vols, folio, 1669. 

^ Expositions of the Old and New Testaments^ London, 1704-1706. 

■^ Family Expositor, 6 vols. 4to, London, 1760-1762. 

^ Family Bible, with notes, 4 vols. 4to, 1796. 



468 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

universities by their religious principles, the nonconformists 
were unable to organize educational institutions of their own 
that were at all adequate, and hence the ministry fell back 
upon dogmatizing or spiritualizing, equally perilous, without 
an exact knowledge of the biblical text.^ 

In the meanwhile, the Humanistic spirit had maintained 
itself in the Church of England, and it found expression 
among the Arminians of Holland. The chief interpreter of 
the seventeenth century was Hugo Grotius, who revived the 
spirit of Erasmus. He laid stress upon historical interpreta- 
tion. ^ He was followed by the Arminians generally, especially 
Clericus. In Great Britain Henry Hammond had the same 
spirit and methods. ^ Edward Pocock* seeks as the main 
thing "to settle the genuine and literal meaning of the text." 
Daniel Whitby ^ also represents this tendency ; and still later 
Bishop Lowth^ and John Taylor of Norwich.'^ The latter 
says : 

" To understand the sense of the Spirit in the New, 'tis essen- 
tially necessary that we understand its sense in the Old Testa- 
ment. But the sense of the Spirit cannot be understood unless 
we understand the language in which that sense is conveyed. 
For which purpose the Hebrew Concordance is the best Expositor. 
For there you have in one view presented all the places of the 
sacred code where any words are used ; and by carefully collating 
those places, may judge what sense it will, or will not bear, which 
being once settled there lies no appeal to any other writing in the 
world : because there are no other books in all the world in the 

1 It is the merit of C. H. Spurgeon that he has recently called attention to the 
neglected Puritan commentators and expressed his great obligations to them. 
See his Commenting and Commentaries, N.Y., 1876, and also Treasury of 
Davids London, 6 vols., 1870 seg., which contains copious extracts from the 
Puritan commentaries. 

2 Annotations in lib. evang., Amst., 1641 ; Annot. in Vet. Test., Paris, 1664. 

3 Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the Books of the New Testament, 
1653, 8vo, 3d ed., folio, London, 1671. In a postscript concerning new light or 
divine illumination, over against the Quakers, he insisted upon the plain, literal, 
and historical sense. 

* Com. on Micah, 1677, Hosea, 1685, Joel, 1691. 

^ Pharaphrase and Commentary on the New Testament, 2 vols., 1703-1709, 
folio. 

6 See p. 227. 

■^ Hebrew Concordance, 2 vols, folio, London, 1754. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 469 

pure original Hebrew, but the books of the Old Testament. A 
judgment therefore duly founded upon them must be absolutely 
decisive." ^ 

Taylor acknowledges his great indebtedness to the philoso- 
pher Locke,2 and shows the influence of that philosophy in his 
exegesis. Toward the close of the century biblical interpreta- 
tion more and more declined in Great Britain, and one must go 
to the continent, and especially to Germany, for the exegesis as 
w^ell as for the Higher and Lower Criticism of modern times. ^ 

VII. Biblical Interpretation of Modern Times 

We have seen in our studies of biblical literature that there 
was a great revival of biblical studies, especially in Germany, 
toward the close of the eighteenth century, which extended to 
all departments. For biblical interpretation Ernesti was the 
chief of the new era. Ernesti was essentially a philologist 
rather than a theologian, and he applied to the Bible the princi- 
ples which he had employed in the interpretation of the ancient 
classics. He began at the foundation of interpretation, gram- 
matical exegesis, and placed it in such a position before the 
world that it has ever since maintained its fundamental impor- 
tance. He published his principles of interpretation in 1761.^ 
Ernesti was followed by Zacharia,^ Morus,^ C. D. Beck,'^ and 
others. Moses Stuart translated Ernesti with the notes of 
Morus abridged.^ 

About the same time as Ernesti, Semler urged the importance 

1 Preface of Hebrew Concordance. See also his Paraphrase with notes on 
the Epistle to the Bomans, London, 1745, pp. 114, 127, 146. 

2 In I.e., p. 149. 3 See pp. 227, 281. 

^ Institutio Interpretis JV. 2., 1761, 3te Aufl., 1774; 5te Aufl., ed, Ammon, 
1809. It was translated into English and edited by Bishop Terrot in 1809 from 
Ammon's edition, for the Biblical Cabinet, I. and IV., Edinburgh. 

^ Einleit. in d. Auslegekunst, 1778. 

6 Aci'oases. acad. super Herm., N. T., 1797 and 1802, ed. by Eichstadt. 

■^ Monogram, hermeneutices librorum N. Foed., Lips., 180.3. 

^ Elementary Principles of Interpretation, translated from the Latin of J. A. 
Ernesti, accompanied by notes, with an appendix containing extracts from 
Morus, Beck, Keil, and Henderson, 4th ed., Andover, 1842. The earlier 
edition was republished in England with additional observations by Dr. Hen- 
derson, London, 1827, which were used in Stuart's fourth edition. 



470 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of historical interpretation.^ Semler was an open-minded, de- 
vout scholar, and appropriated freely the material wherever 
he could find it, and reproduced it in forms fashioned by his 
own genius. He was greatly influenced by foreign inter- 
preters, and was the channel through whom the historical 
interpretation, still lingering in Reformed lands, made its way 
into Lutheran Germany. Among those who influenced Semler 
may be mentioned : J. A. Turretine, who had introduced the 
Swiss revolt against scholasticism,^ John Taylor of Norwich 
and Daniel Whitby,^ and L. Meyer, the Spinozist.^ Semler 
was followed by J. G. Gabler, G. L. Baur, K. C. Bretschneider, 
and others. These elements of interpretation were com.bined 
in the grammatico-historical method of C. A. G. Keil.^ The 
grammatico-historical method was introduced into the United 
States of America chiefly by Moses Stuart and his school. 

The defects of the grammatico-historical method were dis- 
covered, and attacks were made upon it from both sides. 
Kant and his school urged rational and moral exegesis, to 
which the historical must yield as of vastly less importance. 
There was truth in this rising to the moral sense, but as it was 
stated and used by the Kantians it resulted in binding the 
Bible in the fetters of a philosophical system that was far more 
oppressive than the theological system had been. Staudlein,^ 
Stern,^ Stark,^ and Kaiser,^ and above all Germar,^^ rendered 
great ser^dce by urging that the interpreter should enter into 
sympathy with the spirit of the biblical authors. 

On the other side the little band of Pietists of the older 
Tiibingen school urged the inadequacy of the grammatico-his- 
torical method, and insisted upon faith and piety in the inter- 

1 Vorbereit. zur theol. Herm., 1760-1769; Apparatus ad liberalem, N. T. 
Interp., 1767. 

2 De S. S. interp. tractatus Mpartitus, 1728. This was an unauthorized and 
defective edition, and it was repudiated by the author. A better edition was 
edited by Teller in 1776. 

3 See Tholuck, Vermischte Schriften, Hamburg, 1839, pp. 30, 40. 

4 Author of an anonymous treatise : Fhilosophice Script, interpres., 1666. 

5 Lehr. d. Herm., 1810. « Be interp. N. T., 1807. 

■^ Ueber den Begriff und obersten Grundsatz d. hist, interp. d. N. jT., 1815. 
8 Beitr. z. Herm., 1817. ^ System Herm., 1817. 

I'' Beitrag zur allgemein. Hermeneutik, Altona, 1828. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION^ 471 

preter.i The chief of these were Storr,^ Flatt and Steudel of 
Tiibingen, Knapp of Halle, and Seller of Erlangen.^ 

This conflict of principles worked more and more confusion. 
If the older exegesis was at fault in neglecting the human 
element and the variety of features of the Bible on the human 
side, the newer interpreters of the grammatico-historical school 
were still more at fault in neglecting the divine element and 
the unity of the Bible. 

A healthful method of interpretation had been introduced 
from England in the translation of the works of Bishop Lowth, 
which urged literary interpretation. Herder, Eichhorn, and 
others exerted their influence in the same direction. Schleier- 
macher deserves the credit for combining all that had thus far 
been gained into a higher unity, by his organic method of 
interpretation.* 

Schleiermacher lays down his principles in a series of theses: 

" In the application (of Hermeneutics) to the New Testament 
the philological view, which isolates every writing of every author, 
stands over against the dogmatic view, which regards the New 
Testament as the work of one author. Both approach one another 
when one considers that, in the view of the religious contents, the 
identity of the school comes in, and in view of the details, 
the identity of language. . . . The philological view lags behind 
its own principle when it rejects the general dependence for the 
sake of the individual culture. The dogmatic view transcends 
its needs when it rejects individual culture for the sake of 
dependence, and so destroys itself. The only question that re- 
mains is which of the two is to be placed above the other ; and 
this must be decided by the philological view itself in favor of 
its own dependence. When the philological view ignores this it 
annihilates Christianity. When the dogmatic view extends the 
canon of the analogy of faith beyond these limits it annihilates 
Scripture." ^ 

1 Reuss, Gesch. d. H. S. N. T., 4te Aufl., 1864, p. 582 seq. 

2 De sensu historico^ 1778. 

^ Bib. Herm., 1830, edited in Holland by Heringa, and translated from the 
Holland edition and edited with additions by Wm. Wright, London, 1835. 

* His Hermeneutik und Kritik is a posthumous work by his pupil, F. Lticke, 
published in Berlin, 1838, but the influence of his method was felt at an earlier 
date, and expressed by his disciples. 

5 In I.e., pp. 79-81. 



472 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Liicke, of Schleiermacher's school, well states the principle 
when he says that we must 

" so construct the general principles of Hermeneutics as that the 
proper theological element may be united with them in a really 
organic manner, and likewise so fashion and carry on the theo- 
logical element that the general principles of interpretation may 
maintain their full value." ^ 

He also insisted upon love for the Word of God, as the 
indispensable requisite for the interpreter. ^ 

The vast importance of this organic method is seen in the 
exegetical works of De Wette, Neander, Klausen, Bleek, Lutz, 
Meyer, and most of the chief interpreters of modern Germany. 

The greatest defect of interpretation at this time was in the 
lack of apprehension of the true relation of the New Testa- 
ment to the Old Testament. The Old Testament was neg- 
lected by Schleiermacher and many of his school. It was 
necessary for the discipline of Biblical Theology to come into 
the field ere this defect could be overcome. The unfolding of 
the discipline of Biblical Theology in the school of Neander 
established the organic unity of the New Testament in the 
combination of a number of historical types. The organic 
unity of the Old Testament was also especially urged by 
Oehler in the spirit of Neander, together with some of the 
features of the older Tiibingen school. The organic unity of 
the whole Bible has been especially insisted upon by Hofmann 
of Erlangen, Delitzsch, and others of their school. This is a 
further unfolding of the organic principle of Schleiermacher, 
and the revival in another form of the Puritan principle wrapt 
up in the covenant theology, and which has worked through 
the schools of Cocceius and the Pietists, to attach itself to the 
scientific principles of exegesis that have thus far been devel- 
oped. The school of Hofmann claim the principle of the 
history of redemption ^ as the highest attainment of Her- 
meneutics. This insisting above all upon interpreting Script- 
ure as one divine book giving the history of redemption is the 

1 Studien und Krit., 1830, p. 421 ; see also his Grundriss d. N. T. Herm.^ 1817. 

2 See Klausen in I.e., p. 311 ; Immer in I.e., p. QQ ; Reuss in I.e., p. 605. 

3 See Volck, in Zockler, Handb., p. 661 seq. ; Hofmann, Bib. Herni., Nord. 
1880. 



HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION 473 

restatement of the Puritan principle of the gradual revelation 
of the covenants of grace. The variety of the Bible is better 
understood in relation to its unity, and when the genesis of its 
revelation of redemption is made more prominent. 

Francis Roberts already states the principle admirably : 

"Still remember how Jesus Christ is revealed in Scripture, 
gradually in promises and covenants, till the noon-day of the 
gospel shined most clearly. . . . Eor (1) God is a God of order ; 
and He makes known His gracious contrivances orderly. (2) 
Christ, and salvation by Him are treasures too high and precious 
to be disclosed all at once to the church. (3) The state of the 
church is various ; she hath her infancy, her youth, and all the 
degrees of her minority, as also her riper age ; and therefore God 
revealed Christ, not according to his own ability of revealing, but 
according to the churches capacity of receiving. (4) This gradual 
revealing of Christ suits well with our condition in this world, 
which is not perfect, but growing into perfection, fully attainable 
in heaven only. Now this gradual unveiling of the covenant and 
promises in Christ, is to be much considered throughout the whole 
Scripture; that we may see the wisdom of God's dispensations, 
the imperfections of the churches condition here, especially in her 
minority; and the usefulness of comparing the more dark and 
imperfect with the more clear and complete manifestation of the 
mysteries of God's grace in Christ."^ 

1 Z.c, p. 10. 



CHAPTER XIX 

THE PKACTICE OF INTERPRBTATIOl^ OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Holy Scripture is composed of a great number of different 
kinds of literature. As such it is a part of the literature of 
the world, having features in common with all other literatures, 
and also features peculiar to itself. From these circumstances 
arise the fundamental principles of interpretation. Biblical 
interpretation is a section of general interpretation. Here all 
students of the Bible are on common ground. Rationalistic, 
evangelical, scholastical, and mystical, — they should all alike 
begin here. This is the broad base on which the pyramid of 
exegesis is to rise to its apex. It is the merit of Schleiermacher 
that he clearly and definitely established this fundamental re- 
lation. From general interpretation arises: 

I. Grammatical Interpretation 

Holy Scripture is written in human languages. These lan- 
guages contain the scripture which is to be studied. There is 
no other way than to master them, and thoroughly understand 
their grammar.^ 

'^ Only the philologist can be an interpreter. It is true that the 
office of interpretation requires more than mere philology, or an 
acquaintance with language ; but all those other qualifications that 
may belong to it are useless without this acquaintance, whilst on 
the contrary, in very many cases nothing more than this is neces- 
sary for correct interpretation." ^ 

Others than philologists may become interpreters of Script- 
ure by depending upon the labours of philologists in the trans- 

1 See Chap. IIL 

2 Planck, Introduction to Sacred Philology and Interpretation., trans, and 
edited by S. H. Turner, Edin., 1834, pp. 140-i4L 

474 



THE PRACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 475 

lations and expositions that they produce — but without these 
the originals of Scripture would be as inaccessible as the 
Hamathite inscriptions, which still defy the efforts of scholars 
to decipher them. 

The great defect of ancient and mediaeval interpretation was 
in the neglect of the grammar of the Bible, and in the depend- 
ence upon defective texts of the Septuagint and Vulgate ver- 
sions.^ Hence the multitude of errors that came into the 
traditional exegesis through the Fathers and schoolmen, and 
became rooted in the history of doctrine and the customs of 
the Church as evil weeds, so that it has taken generations of 
grammatical study to eradicate them. It is the merit of Ernesti 
in modern times that he so insisted upon grammatical exegesis 
as to induce exegetes of all classes to begin their work here at 
the foundation. Grammatical exegesis is, however, dependent 
upon the progress of linguistic studies. There has been great 
progress in the knowledge of the New Testament Greek : in 
the study of the dialects, in the comparison of the Greek with 
its cognates of the Indo-Germanic family of languages, in the 
science of etymology of words, and still more in the history of 
the use of words in Greek literature. In the study of the He- 
brew language there has been still greater progress. When one 
traces the history of its study in modern times, and rises from 
Levita and Reuchlin, through Buxtorf and Castell, Schultens 
and John Taylor, to Gesenius, Rodiger, and Ewald, Kautzsch, 
Stade, Konig, Buhl, Driver, and Francis Brown, one feels that 
he is climbing to greater and greater heights. The older in- 
terpreters, who knew nothing of comparative Shemitic phi- 
lology, who did not understand the position of the Hebrew 
language in the development of the Shemitic family, who were 
ignorant of its rich and varied syntax, who relied on traditional 
meanings of words, and had not learned their etymologies and 
their historic growth, lived almost in another world. The 
modern Hebrew scholars are working in far more extended 
relations, and upon vastly deeper principles, and we should not 
be surprised at new and almost revolutionary results. 

1 See pp. 219, 456. 



476 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

II. Logical and Rhetorical Interpretations 

The second stage of our pyramid of exegesis is logical and 
rhetorical interpretation. Here also there are general features 
in common with other literatures, and also features peculiar to 
Biblical Literature. 

(«) The laws of thought are derived from the human mind 
itself. These enable us to determine the value of all thought, 
to discriminate the true, close, exact reasoning from the inexact 
and fallacious. It is assumed by some that the Bible is divine 
in such a sense that it corresponds with these laws of thought 
exactly and is faultless in its logic. If this be so, it is astonish- 
ing that we find so little that is technical, or in the form of 
logical propositions, in the Bible. Here was the fault of the 
Jewish Halacha, and the mediaeval dialectic, and the modern 
scholastic use of proof texts. The Bible has been interpreted 
by the formulas of Aristotle in the Middle Age, and then by the 
logical methods of the different philosophies in the modern age. 
These scholastic and philosophical logicians overlook the fact 
that pure logic is one thing, applied logic another, and the his- 
tory of its application a third. There are differences in logic 
as in other things. Human logic is far from infallible. Our 
modern logic has not remained in the state of innocence, nor 
has it reached the state of perfection. Certainly there are few, 
if any, dogmatic divines and philosophers who do not violate 
its principles and neglect its methods as stated in our logical 
manuals. Every race has, indeed, its own methods of reason- 
ing. The German and the French minds move in somewhat 
different grooves. Still more is this the case when we consider 
the Hebrew and the Greek and the Anglo-Saxon. The biblical 
writers wrote for the men of their own time and used the forms 
of thought of the men of their time. It is not sufficient, there- 
fore, to apply logical analysis to the text of the Scripture, as is 
so often done.^ The proper use of logical interpretation is to 
seek for the method of reasoning of the biblical author, — his 
plan, his scope, his course of argument, and the relation of 
his methods to those of his contemporaries. 

1 Lange, Hermeneutik^ p, 43. 



THE PRACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 477 

" The Scripture dotli not explaine tlie will of God by universal 
and scientific rules, but by narrations, examples, precepts, exhorta- 
tions, admonitions, and promises ; because that manner doth make 
most for the common use of all kinde of men, and also most to 
affect the will, and stirre up godly motions, which is the chief 
scope of divinity." ^ 

" Language is not the invention of metaphysicians or convoca- 
tions of the wise and learned. It is the common blessing of man- 
kind, framed for their mutual advantage in their intercourse with 
each other. Its laws therefore are popular, not philosophical, 
being founded on the general laws of thought which govern the 
whole mass in the community. . . . Scarcely will we hear in a 
long and serious conversation between the best speakers, a sen- 
tence which does not need some modification or limitation in order 
that we may not attribute to it more or less that was intended. 
Nor is the operation at all difficult. We make the correction 
instantly, with so little cost of thought that we would be tempted 
to call it instinct did we not know that many of our perceptions 
which seem intuitive are the results of habit and education. It 
would be an exceedingly strange thing, if the Bible, the most 
popular of all books, composed by men, for the most part taken 
from the multitude, addressed to all, and on subjects interesting 
to all, were found written in language to be interpreted on differ- 
ent principles. But, in point of fact, it is not. Its style is emi- 
nently, and to a remarkable degree, that which we would expect 
to find in a volume designed by its gracious Author to be the 
people^ s book — abounding in all those kinds of inaccuracy which 
are sprinkled through ordinary discourse; hyperboles, analogies, 
and loose catachrestical expressions, whose meaning no one mis- 
takes, though their deviation from plumb, occasionally makes the 
small critic sad." ^ 

Again, it is an abuse of logical interpretation to regard the 
biblical writers as all alike logical. Those who take the logical 
methods of St. Paul as the key to the New Testament, and in- 
terpret, by the apostle to the Gentiles, the practical St. Peter 
and St. James and the mystic St. John, and above all our blessed 
Lord Jesus Himself, the Son of man, embracing in Himself all 
the types of humanity for the redemption of all, — do violence 
to these other writers, rend the seamless robe of the gospel, and 
do not aid the proper understanding of St. Paul himself. Those 

1 Ames, Marrovj of Sacred Divinity^ London, 1643. 

2 McClelland, Manual of Sacred Interpretation, N.Y., 1842, pp. 61-63, 



478 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

who would find the key of the Old Testament in the Wisdom 
Literature, would commit a most unpardonable blunder. How 
much greater is the sin of those who first insist upon interpret- 
ing the epistles of St. Paul in accordance with the analytical 
principles of modern logic, and then of interpreting all the rest 
of the New Testament by this interpretation of St. Paul, and 
then the whole body of the Hebrew Old Testament by this in- 
terpretation of the New Testament. In view of such a method, 
one might inquire, why take all this trouble to impose meanings 
upon such a vast body of ancient literature ? It would be far 
easier and more honest to construct the dogmatic system by 
logical principles, and leave the Bible to itself. We are not 
surprised that when and where such methods have prevailed, 
biblical studies have been neglected and despised. 

(h) Rhetorical interpretation is closely connected with logi- 
cal. There are common features of rhetoric that belong to all 
discourse, and there are special features which are peculiar to 
the Biblical Literature. The Bible has been tested and inter- 
preted too often, after Greek, German, French, and English 
models. We have to discriminate in the Bible the more logi- 
cal parts from the more rhetorical parts. The fault of the 
Halacha and scholastic methods was in their overlooking the 
rhetorical features of the Bible. The fault of the Haggada 
and allegorical methods was in overlooking the logical. In 
rhetorical exegesis it is essential to discriminate poetry from 
prose, the different kinds of poetry and prose from each other, 
the style of each author, as well as the literar}^ peculiarities of 
the people and race which produced the Bible. Here is a field 
of study which promises still greater rewards to those who will 
pursue it,i and it will prove of especial richness to the homilist 
and catechist. 

III. Historical Interpretation 

Thus far all parties work in common. As we rise to the 
higher stage of historical interpretation there arise differences 
between the rationalistic and supernaturalistic interpreters, 
owing to certain presuppositions with which they approach the 

1 See Chap. Xin. 



THE PEACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 479 

Bible. There are different conceptions of history. The super- 
naturalistic interpreters recognize the supernatural element as 
the determining factor ; the rationalistic interpreters endeavour 
to explain everything by purely natural laws. Among believ- 
ers in the supernatural there is also a difference, in that some 
are ever resorting to the supernatural to explain the history, 
while other more judicious interpreters explain by the natural 
element until they are compelled by overpowering evidence to 
resort to the supernatural. Semler has the credit in modern 
times of laying great stress on the historic interpretation. In 
historical exegesis we have to recognize that the biblical writers 
were men of their times and yet men above their times. They 
were influenced by inspiration to introduce ncAV divine revela- 
tions, and to revive old truths and set them in new lights ; 
they were reformers, and so came into conflict with the con- 
servatives of their time. Many errors spring up here. The 
Pharisees interpreted the Old Testament by tradition. The 
scholastics pursue the same course v/ith reference to the New 
Testament. The rationalists interpret Scripture altogether by 
history and natural forces. Here the scholastic and rationalis- 
tic interpreters of our times lock horns. They are both alike 
in error. Tradition is the bastard of history and should be 
resorted to only when we have no history, and then with cau- 
tion and suspicion as to its origin. History is to help, not 
rule ; for in the history of redemption the supernatural force 
shapes and controls history. The true method is to rise from 
the natural to the supernatural. History has been impregnated 
with the supernatural. We must not expect to find the super- 
natural everywhere on the surface. The supernatural comes 
into play only when the natural is incapable of accomplishing 
the divine purpose; so it is to be sought when it alone is 
capable of affording explanation of the phenomena. Then the 
supernatural displays itself with convincing, assuring force. 
Lutz has some admirable remarks here : ^ 

" The historico-grammatical method of interpretation has brought 
out truths which cannot be valued too highly. No book needs 
more than the Holy Scriptures to be understood in accordance 

1 Bib. Herm., Pforzheim, 1861, 2te Ausg., p. 168. 



480 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

with the times in which they were first read. . . . But it is 
just as true that such an exposition in its one-sidedness limiting 
itself to grammar and history, entirely loses sight of the peculiar 
features of the Bible, and would bring about a complete separation 
between church and exegesis. Thereby the church would be de- 
prived of its light, and exegesis Avould dig its own grave." 

TV. Comparative Interpretation 

In rising to comparative interpretation we have to distin- 
guish still further the attitude of interpreters toward the Bible. 
Supernaturalists come to the Bible as a sacred Canon, an or- 
ganic whole. Rationalists come to the Bible as a collection of 
merely human writings. It is the merit of the Puritans, of 
the Federalists of Holland, and in recent times of the schools 
of Schleiermacher and Hofmann, that they urged the organic 
unity of Scripture. It is presumed that writers are consistent, 
and that writers of the same school are in substantial accord. 
This is a general presumption derived from the study of all 
literature. But we must go further and insist that as all the 
writers of the Bible are of the school of the Hol}^ Spirit and all 
conspired to give us the complete organism of the Canon, there 
is a unity and concord that extends throughout the Bible. 
There is error here on the right and the left. The rationalists 
regard the Bible as a bundle of miscellaneous and heteroge- 
neous writings. The scholastics regard them as a homogeneous 
mass. As Lange says : 

"We should read the Bible as a human book, but not as a 
heathen book ; as a divino-human book according to the fact that 
there is a distinction between elect men of God who walk on the 
heights of humanity and the populace in the low plains of human- 
ity ; as the documents of revelation, which participate throughout 
in the revelation, the unicum among all religious writings." ^ 

The rationalists sink the unity in the variety ; the scholas- 
tics destroy the variety for the sake of the unity. The true 
position is, that the Bible is a vast organism in which the unity 
springs from an amazing variety. The unity is not that of a 
mass of rocks or a pool of water. It is the unity that one finds 

1 Grundriss d. bib. HermeneutiA', Heidelberg, 1878, p. 68. 



THE PRACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 481 

in the best works of God. It is the unity of the ocean, where 
every wave has its individuality of life and movement. It is 
the unity of the continent, in which mountains and rivers, val- 
leys and uplands, flowers and trees, birds and insects, animal 
and human life combine to distinguish it as a magnificent whole 
from other continents. It is the unity of the heaven, where 
star differs from star in form, colour, order, movement, size, and 
importance, but all declare the glory of God. 

V. The Literature of Interpretation 

The fifth stage of exegesis is the use of the literature of 
interpretation. The Bible is the Canon of the Christian 
Church. What relation does it sustain to the Church ? We 
are separated from the originals by ages. Multitudes of stu- 
dents have studied the Bible, and their labour has not been in 
vain. As a prince of modern preachers says : 

" In order to be able to expound the Scriptures, and as an aid to 
your pulpit studies, you will need to be familiar with the com- 
mentators : a glorious army, let me tell you, whose acquaintance 
will be your delight and profit. Of course, you are not such wise- 
acres as to think or say that you can expound Scripture without 
assistance from the works of divines and learned men, who have 
labored before you in the field of exposition. ... It seems odd, 
that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals 
to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to 
others." ^ 

But the question presses itself upon the exegete, how far he 
is to go in allowing himself to be influenced by the history of 
exegesis. The Roman Catholic Church makes the literature 
of the Church itself, the consent of the Fathers, the decision of 
councils, and the official utterances of the Popes the authorita- 
tive expositors of Holy Scripture, to which all other exposition 
is to be conformed. We have learned from the history of exe- 
gesis how cautious we should be with the expositions of the 
Fathers. 2 We have found the best interpreters using false 
methods and following false principles. The literature of 
exegesis is an invaluable help, but this help is negative as well 

1 Spurgeon, Commenting and Commentaries^ p. 11. 2 ggg pp 447 ggg_ 

2i 



482 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

as positive. It exhibits a vast multitude of errors that have 
been exposed, and so prevents us from stumbling into them. 
It shows us a great number of positions so plainly established 
and fortified, that it were folly to question them. But at the 
same time it presents a number of positions so weakly sup- 
ported that they excite suspicion of their validity ; and others, 
where contests have not resulted in settlement. The literature 
of exegesis enables us to understand the real state of the ques- 
tions that have to be determined by the interpreter of the 
Scriptures. It prevents us from wasting our energies in doing 
what others have done before us, or in working in barren or 
unprofitable fields ; and it directs us to the fruitful soil of the 
Bible, the mines to be worked, and the problems to be solved. 
If it is suicidal for interpretation to limit itself to the exegesis 
of the Fathers and the schoolmen, it is just as perilous to im- 
plicitly follow the Reformers and theologians of the Protestant 
churches. It would result in our forsaking the interpretation 
of the Scriptures, and devoting ourselves to the interpretation 
of the interpreters. In some respects Protestants have been in 
greater bondage here than Roman Catholics, for Roman Catho- 
lics have been held in check only by the authoritative decisions 
of the Church and the consent of the Fathers, whereas Protes- 
tant interpreters have very generally followed the private 
opinions of Luther, or Calvin, or Knox, or Wesley, or some 
other. If there is to be a limitation it is safer that such limits 
should be found in a consensus or official decision than that 
they should be found in any individual, however great he 
may be. 

Francis Roberts happily says : 

" There must be constant caution that all tongues, arts, histories, 
translations, and comments be duly ranked in their proper place, 
in a subserviency under, not a regency or predominancy over the 
Holy Scriptures, which are to controule them all. For when 
Hagar shall once usurp over her mistress, it's high time to cast 
her out of doors till she submit herself." ^ 

1 In Lc, p. 5. 



THE PKACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 483 



VI. Doctrinal Interpretation 

In rising a stage higher in our pyramid to doctrinal interpre- 
tation, we must part company with the Protestant scholastics, 
for which we have been prepared, as were Abraham and Lot, 
by previous minor contentions. The Bible contains a divine 
revelation. The Bible gives the rule of faith. It is to be in- 
terpreted in accordance with the analogy of faith. This anal- 
ogy is the substance of Scripture doctrine found in the plainest 
passages of Scripture. This was the view of the Reformers. 
But the scholastics substituted for this internal rule of faith an 
external rule of faith, — first in the Apostles' Creed, then in the 
symbols of the churches, and finally in the Reformed or Lu- 
theran, or some other sectarian system of doctrine. And thus 
the Sacred Scripture became the slave of dogmatic systems. 
The modern exegete finds a Biblical Theology in the Bible itself 
which he has learned to carefully distinguish from Dogmatic 
Theology. He has found that Saint Peter and Saint John and 
Saint James and Saint Paul were all disciples of Jesus Christ, 
and have in Him their centre and life; that no one of them can 
be relied on in the writings attributed to him for a complete 
statement of Christian doctrine and Christian life, that all have 
to be comprehended in a large synthesis for a complete under- 
standing of Christianity. The modern interpreter has learned 
that the Old Testament is an organic whole, in which priests 
and prophets, sages and poets find their centre and life in the 
theophanies of God. He has learned that Yahweh and Jesus 
are one, and that in the Messiah of prophecy and history the 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments become an organic 
whole. With this bringing forth of the internal substance of 
the Scriptures in its unity and variety, theological exposition 
finds its satisfaction and delight, and the analogy of faith is 
harmonized with the principles of interpretation which have 
prepared the way for its advance and achievements.^ Francis 
Roberts saw this in part and stated it fairly well in the seven- 
teenth century. 2 

■ 1 See Chap. XXIII. 2 ic., p. 10. 



484 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

"Now that we may more successfully and clearly understand 
Scripture by Scripture, these ensueing particulars are to be ob- 
served: (1) That Jesus Christ our mediator and the salvation of 
sinners hy Him is the very substance, marroiv, soul, and scope of the 
whole Scriptures. What are the whole Scriptures, but as it were 
the spiritual swadling cloathes of the Holy child Jesus. (1) 
Christ is the truth and substance of all the types and shadows. 
(2) Christ is the matter and substance of the Covenant of G-race 
under all administrations thereof ; under the Old Testament Christ 
is veyled, under the New Covenant revealed. (3) Christ is the 
centre and meeting-place of all the promises, for in him all the 
promises of God are yea, and they are Amen. (4) Christ is 
the thing signified, sealed, and exhibited in all the sacraments of 
Old and New Testaments, whether ordinary or extraordinary. (5) 
Scripture genealogies are to lead us on to the true line of Christ. 
(6) Scripture chronologies are to discover to us the times and 
seasons of Christ. (7) Scripture laws are our schoolmaster to 
bring us to Christ ; the moral by correcting, the ceremonial by 
directing. And (8) Scripture gospel is Christ's light, whereby we 
know him ; Christ's voice, whereby we hear and follow him ; 
Christ's cords of love, whereby we are drawn into sweet union and 
communion with him ; yea it is the power of God unto salvation 
unto all them that believe in Christ Jesus. Keep therefore still 
Jesus Christ in your eye, in the perusal of the Scripture, as the 
end, scope, and substance thereof. For as the sun gives light to 
all the heavenly bodies, so Jesus Christ the sun of righteousness 
gives light to all the Holy Scriptures." 

VII. Practical Interpretation 

In rising now to the highest stage of interpretation — prac- 
tical interpretation — we part company with the mystics as well 
as the scholastics. The Bible is a book of life, a people's book, 
a book of conduct. It came from the living God. It tends to 
the living God. Here is the apex of the pyramid of interpre- 
tation. He who has not reached this stage has stopped on the 
way and will not understand the Bible. The Bible brings the 
interpreter to God. We can understand the Bible only by 
mastering it. We need the master key. No one but the Mas- 
ter Himself can give it to us. It is necessary to know God and 
His Christ in order to know the Bible. The Scriptures cannot 
be understood from the outside by grammar, logic, rhetoric. 



THE PRACTICE OF INTERPRETATION 485 

and liistory alone. The Bible cannot be understood when in- 
volved in the labyrinth of its doctrines. The Bible is to be 
understood from its centre — its heart — its Christ. Jesus 
Christ does not reveal Himself ordinarily aside from the Bible, 
by new revelations outside of it casting new light upon it from 
the exterior, as the mystics suppose. But the Messiah is the 
light-centre of the Scriptures themselves. He is enthroned in 
them as His Holy of Holies, as was Yahweh in the ancient 
temple. Through the avenues of the Scriptures we go to find 
Christ — in their centre we find our Saviour. It is this per- 
sonal relation of the author of the entire Scripture to the inter- 
preter that enables him truly to understand the divine things 
of the Scripture. Jesus Christ knew the Old Testament and 
interpreted it as one who knew the mind of God.^ He needed 
no helps to climb the j^yramid of interpretation. He ever lived 
at the summit. The apostles interpreted the Sacred Scriptures 
from the mind of Christ, read by the Spirit He had given 
them. 2 We have no such divine help. These who claim such 
help are mistaken. They mistake the ordinary guidance of the 
Divine Spirit, always given to the devout Christian, for His 
extraordinary guidance given to the founders of the Church. 
They are presumptuous in assuming to rank with the founders 
of the Church. We cannot use their a 'priori methods, but we 
may climb toward them. We may have all the enthusiasm of 
the quest — all the joy of discovery. 

It is not necessary for us to complete our studies of the lower 
stages of exegesis ere we climb higher. The exegete is not 
building the pyramid. He is climbing it. Every passage tends 
toward the summit. Some interpreters remain forever in the 
lowest stages. Others spring hastily to the higher stages and 
fall back crippled and are flung down to the lowest. The 
patient, faithful, honest exegete climbs steadily and laboriously 
to the summit. 

The doctrine that the Holy Spirit is the supreme interpreter 

of Scripture is the highest attainment of interpretation. The 

greatest leaders of the Church in all ages have acted on this 

principle, however defective their apprehension of it may have 

1 See p. 442. 2 See p. 443. 



486 STUDY or holy scripture 

been, and however little they may have consciously used it in 
the interpretation of the Holy Scripture. It was this conscious- 
ness of knowing the mind of the Spirit and having the truth of 
God that made them invincible. It was Athanasius against 
the world. With the Divine Truth of the blessed Trinity he 
was mightier than the world. It was Luther against pope and 
emperor. He could do no other. The Word of God in his 
hands and in his heart assured him of forgiveness of sin and 
justification by faith ; and poor, weak man though he was, he 
was mightier than Church and State combined. 

It is this principle "that the supreme judge, by which all 
controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees 
of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and 
private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we 
are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the 
Scripture," ^ that made the Puritan faith and life invincible. 

Let us cling to it as the most precious achievement of British 
Christianity ; let us raise it on our banners, and advance with 
it into the conflicts of the day ; let us plant it on every hill 
and in every valley throughout the world ; let us not only give 
the Bible into the hands of men and translate it into their 
tongues, but let us put it into their hearts, and translate it 
into their lives. Then will biblical interpretation reach its 
culmination in practical interpretation, in the experience and 
life of mankind. 

1 Westminster Confession, I. 10. 



CHAPTER XX 

HISTORY OF THE STUDY OF BIBLICAL HISTOEY 

The historical material contained in Holy Scripture must be 
tested and verified just the same as all other historical material. 
Until this historical criticism has done its work, faithfully, 
thoroughly, and well, the material may have religious value for 
all who are willing to accept it on the testimony of the Church 
or because of its religious influence upon themselves or others, 
but it cannot have any scientific value ; it cannot be used as a 
reliable part of human knowledge. 

The historical criticism of biblical history has the same 
methods and principles as those employed by historical criti- 
cism in all other departments. In the study of Holy Scripture 
these principles and methods should be used reverently, because 
of the holy character of the material, but with all the more 
scrupulous thoroughness and accuracy. 

The historical material contained in Holy Scripture has been 
used for many centuries by Jew and Christian, and employed 
not only for religious purposes but also for historical purposes. 
But it is only in quite recent times that any serious attempt 
has been made to study biblical history in a scientific spirit 
and by the use of historical criticism. 

I. The Use of Biblical History prior to the Six- 
teenth Century 

Josephus is the father of Biblical History outside the Bible. 
In his Antiquities (20 books), and JeivisTi War (7 books), he 
endeavours, as an advocate of the Jewish people, to set forth 
their history in the most favourable light before the Greek and 
Roman world of his time. He was an excellent and, indeed, 

487 



488 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

brilliant writer and story-teller, but he had no conscience for 
historical accuracy, and had little interest in the discrimination 
of truth from error, or fact from fiction. Philo wrote a life 
of Moses, but it has no historical value; it is altogether alle- 
gorical and didactic in its purpose. 

Subsequent to Josephus there seems to have been no interest 
in biblical history among the Jews. Their whole life was in 
the study and practice of the Law, and the only use the 
rabbins made of history was to illustrate and enforce the Law. 
For this purpose they did not hesitate to embellish history and 
transform it into historic fiction. This method goes back into 
the Old Testament Canon itself, into the stories of Daniel and 
Esther, Ruth and Jonah, and even into the Chronicler and 
the Deuteronomic writers, who idealized the past in order to 
enforce the historic lessons they would teach. ^ The onl}' his- 
torical works used by the Jews until modern times were the 
Sedar olam rahha and Sedar olam zutta,^ which were again and 
again interpolated in the course of the centuries. 

Among Christians the earliest historical efforts were natu- 
rally upon the life of Christ and the acts of the apostles. A 
large number of apocryphal books of this kind were produced, 
none of which gained extensive recognition. They were full 
of mythical and legendar}^ material, and were all eventually 
pushed aside and crowded into oblivion by the canonical 
Gospels and book of Acts. The orthodox limited themselves 
to the construction of harmonies and poetical representations 
of various kinds. The Harmony of Tatian was extensively 
used in the Eastern Church, and among the Syrians crowded 
the four Gospels out of use for several generations. The 
earliest Christian efforts to present biblical history in a more 
systematic way were those of Hegesippus and Julius Africanus. 
Hegesippus,^ in the latter part of the second century, wrote 
five books of memoirs, the result of his historical investigations 
at Rome and elsewhere. But only fragments have been pre- 
served. Julius Africanus, of the first half of the third cen- 
tury, wrote five volumes of chronology, which were extant in 

1 See p. 341 seq. ^ See p. 235. 

SEusebius, Church History, McGiffert's ed., II. 23; IV. 22, pp. 125, 198. 



HISTOKY OF BIBLICAL HISTOKY 489 

Jerome's time,^ but which have perished with the exception of 
fragments. Eusebius in the fourth century was the chief his- 
torian of the ancient Church, the father of Church history. He 
wrote a chronicle giving the history of the world up to his own 
times and chronological tables. ^ He takes up into his ecclesias- 
tical history all that was deemed valuable in the earlier writ- 
ings, and in geographical work laid the foundation for biblical 
geography. 3 

In the Latin Church the first and chief writer upon biblical 
history was Sulpicius Severus ((?. 400 B.C.). He wrote a sacred 
history in two books. The first book extends from the creation 
of the world until the exile, in 54 chapters ; the second book, 
from the exile until the martyrdom of Priscillian, in 51 chap- 
ters. The story of Christ is told in a single chapter, 27, and 
the story of the apostles in two chapters, 28-29. There is no 
discrimination between historic fact and fiction. Judith and 
Esther and the tales of the Maccabees take their place in the 
history on the same level as the most important events of the 
Old and New Testaments. Augustine, in his de civitate dei, uses 
biblical history merely in the interests of Christian doctrine. 

In the Middle Ages biblical history was studied for dog- 
matic or devotional purposes. Many poetical representations 
were made for the instruction of the people, and ancient har- 
monies were reproduced and devotional studies were given. 
The greatest work upon biblical history in all this period was 
the Life of Christy by Rudolf of Saxony, 1470, which went 
through many editions. It is innocent of any historic sense, 
and knows no difference between fact and fable. 

II. The Study of Biblical History in the Sixteenth 
AND Seventeenth Centuries 

The Reformation was not a revival of historical studies so 
much as of literary and dogmatic studies. There were sev- 
eral efforts to study the Gospels and the Pentateuch in a 

1 Jerome, De viris illustribus, 63. 

2 xpovLKOL Kavoves, see McGiffert's Eusebius, 3L 

3 irept tQ)v tottikQp ovoiidTwv tQjv iv t^ Oeiq. ypacpy, translated in the Onomas- 
ticon of Jerome. 



490 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUKE 

harmonistic way. The most important works of this kind 
were the G-ospel Harmonies of Osiander, 1537, and Chemnitz, 
1593 ; and especially the Harmony of the Pentateuch and the 
Harmony of the Grospels by Calvin. 

It was not until the middle of the seventeenth century that 
Biblical History became of interest, and then chiefly from an 
archaeological point of view, because of the increased attention 
to the study of the Hebrew and Greek languages and antiqui- 
ties. A great collection of writings of archaeological writers 
from this period was subsequently made by Ugolino.^ 

Scaliger laid the foundations for chronology ^ and Usher ^ 
wrote an invaluable work upon the chronology of the Old and 
New Testaments, which has been the basis of all chronological 
studies until recent times. But other scholars, such as Good- 
win,* Lightfoot,^ Selden,^ Buxtorf,^ Bochart,^ and Vitringa,^ 
made special investigations in various departments and en- 
larged the field of historical knowledge. They did not criti- 
cally sift their material, but they gathered it and arranged it 
for subsequent sifting by historical criticism. 

III. The Study of Biblical Histoky in the Eigh- 
teenth Century 

In the eighteenth century the conflict between Christianity 
and Deism, Atheism, and Rationalism, led to a re-investigation 
of the entire field of biblical history, in which England, France, 
Holland, Switzerland, and Germany shared. On the one side 
every effort was put forth to discredit the supernatural in 

1 Thesaurus antiquitatt. sacra, 34 vols, folio, Venice, 1744-1769. 

2 Thesaurus temporum Eusehii, 1606. 

3 Annales Vet. et iV. Test., 2 vols., 1650-1654. 
* 3Ioses et Aaron, 1616. 

5 Harmony of the Gospels, 1644-1650 ; Embim, 1629 ; Acts of the Apostles, 
1645 ; Harmony, chronicles, and order of the Old Testament, 1647 ; Harmony, 
chronicle, and order of the New Testament, 1655 ; and especially Hor(B 
Hehraicce et Talmudicce, 1658-1664. 

6 De jure naturali et gentium juxta disciplinam Hebrceorum, 1640 ; De suc- 
cessions in pontificatum Hebrceorum, 1638; De Synedriis, 1650. 

'^ Synagoga Judaica, 1604. 

8 Gcographia sacra seu Fhaleg et Canaan, 1646 ; Hierozoicon, 1663. 

9 Hypotyposes histories et chronologies Sacra^, 1698. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 491 

biblical history and to put it in the category of all other 
ancient histories, and even to depreciate it as a mass of 
legends and fables. On the other side, every effort was made 
to defend the supernatural, and even to exaggerate it. A 
middle course was pursued by a few. These strove to con- 
serve all that was true and real in the history, and to let all 
that was untrue perish. A terrible sifting went on, and all 
the material gathered with so much industry in the previous 
century had to pass through the fire. In England the prin- 
cipal writers of solid merit were Prideaux,^ Schuckford,^ Stack- 
house,^ Paley ; - in France, Basnage,^ Calmet ; ^ in Holland, 
Reland ^ and Spanheim ; ^ in Germany, Buddeus,^ Waehner,!^ 
Bengel,!^ Rous,i2 Hess,!^ and Michaelis.^^ 

IV. Biblical Historical Criticism in the Nineteenth 

Century 

Toward the close of the eighteenth century. Herder,!^ and 
especially Eichhorn,^^ laid the foundations for a more historical 
study of Holy Scripture, and began to use the historical mate- 
rial in the Bible with a genuine historical spirit. They en- 
deavoured to put the biblical writings in the midst of the 
scenery of the ancient world, and to interpret them with a true 
understanding of their literary characteristics. They saw the 
many sources and variety of colours of the historical material ; 

1 The Old and New Testaments Connected, 1716-1718. 

2 Sacred and Profane History of the World, 1728. 

3 New History of the Holy Bible, 2 vols., 1732. * Horce Paulince, 1790. 
^ Histoire des Juifs depuis Jesus- Christ jusqu' a present, 1706. 

® Dictionnaire de la Bible, 1722. 

'' Antiquitates Sacroe, 1708 ; Palestina ex monumentis, 1704. 

^ Opera quatenus complectantur geographiam, chronologiam et historiam 
sacram, 1701-1703. 

9 Hist. eccl. Vet. Test., 2 Bde., 1715. 
1'' Antiquitates Hebrceorum, 2 vols., 1701-1703. 

11 Oi'do temporum, 1741. 12 Einleitung in d. Bib. Gesch., 1770. 

13 Gesch. d. 3 letzten Lebensjahre JesUj 1768 ; Apostelgeschichte, 3 Bde., 1775 ; 
Gesch. der Israeliten, 12 Bde., 1776-1788. 

1* Spicilegium geographiae Heb., 1769 ; Mosaisches Becht, 6 Bde., 1770-1775. 

15 Alteste Urkunde des ^lenschengeschlechts, 1774. 

16 Eichhorn, Urgeschichte, first published in the Bepertorium, 1779, and after- 
wards edited by Gabler, 1791, 1793. 



492 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

they knew how to appreciate the mythical and legendary mate- 
rial in Holy Scripture, and they endeavoured to reconcile these 
historical features with their holy character and religious use. 
The recognition, by such a preeminent biblical scholar as 
Eichhorn, of the mythical, legendary, and poetic material in 
the Holy Scriptures and their use of more ancient documents, 
gave a new impulse to the study of Biblical History. The study 
of Biblical History had thus far been unscientific and capricious, 
both on the side of the Supernaturalists and their Deistic, 
Atheistic, and Rationalistic opponents. The Supernaturalists 
were loath to recognize anything like legend and myth, and 
they were reluctant to admit even poetry and original docu- 
ments. Their opponents were more concerned to discredit the 
materials of biblical history than to test their true character- 
istics. 

Thomas Payne may be taken as a representative of the views 
of the Deists at the close of the century. A few sentences from 
his famous book may suffice. " It is not the antiquity of a tale 
that is any evidence of its truth ; on the contrary, it is a symptom 
of its being fabulous ; for the more ancient any history pretends 
to be, the more it has the resemblance of a fable. The origin of 
every nation is buried in fabulous tradition, and that of the Jews 
is as much to be suspected as any other." ^ " Speaking for myself, 
if I had no other evidence that the Bible is fabulous than the 
sacrifice I must make to believe it to be true, that alone would 
be sufficient to determine my choice." ^ 

Speaking of the immaculate conception he says, ^^ This story is, 
upon the face of it, the same kind of story as that of Jupiter and 
Leda, or Jupiter and Europa, or any of the amorous adventures of 
Jupiter, and shews, as is already stated in the former part of the 
Age of Reason, that the Christian faith is built upon the heathen 
Mythology." ^ 

Speaking of the resurrection he says, " The story of the appear- 
ance of Jesus Christ is told with that strange mixture of the natu- 
ral and impossible that distinguishes legendary tale from fact.""* 

It is evident that Payne, like all his associates and predecessors 
of the Deistic school of writers, plays fast and loose with tales, 
legends, and myths, and is destitute of auy real scientific or his- 
toric interest. 

1 Age of JReason, Conway's edition, N.Y., 1896, p. 90. 

2Z.c.,p. 90. 3;.c..p. 153. 4z.c.,p. 169. 



HISTORY OE BIBLICAL HISTORY 493 

V. The Mythical Hypothesis 

Through the influence of Eichhorn a scientific and historic 
interest began to prevail, and scholars set themselves to work 
to ascertain how much poetry, fiction, legend, and myth was 
contained in the Bible, and how the real facts and truths of 
history could be eliminated therefrom. Many scholars took 
part in the investigation, but the most comprehensive work 
was done by DeWette^ and G. L. Baur.^ De Wette recog- 
nized the poetic, mythical, and legendary material in biblical 
history, not only in the early history of Israel, but also in the 
life of Jesus. G. L. Baur was, however, the first to apply the 
theory of the myth in a thorough-going manner to the explana- 
tion of Biblical History. But he, and all others, were outdone 
by Strauss, who in 1835 used the mythical theory in a most 
drastic manner for the interpretation of the life of Jesus. 

The situation is well described by A. M. Fairbairn: 

" Strauss elaborated his hypothesis with extraordinary inge- 
nuity. The air was full of mythological theories. Wolf's 
Prolegomena had started many questions — critical, mythical, 
religious — as to the Homeric poems and primitive Greece. Nie- 
buhr had carried a new light into the history of ancient Eome. 
Heyne had enunciated the principle, A mythis omnis priscoruiii 
hominum cum historia turn 2)^^ilosophia procedit ; and he and Her- 
mann had, though under specific differences, resolved mythology 
into a consciously invented and elaborately concealed science of 
nature and man. Creuzer had made it a religious symbolism, 
under which was hidden an earlier and purer faith. Ottfried 
Mtiller, in a finer and more scientific spirit, had explained myths 
as created by the reciprocal action of two factors, the real and 
ideal, and had traced in certain cases their rise even in the his- 
torical period. The same tendence had existed in scriptural as 
in classical studies. Mythical interpretations had been applied 
long before to certain sections of the Old Testament. Eichhorn 
and Baur, Vater and De Wette, had employed it with greater or 
less freedom and thoroughness. It had even been carried into the 
New Testament, and made to explain the earlier and later events 

1 KritiTc d. israelitischer Geschichte, 1806 ; see also article De Wette in 
Herzog, E.E.. Bd. 17, s. 12 seq. 

2 Geschichte der Heh. Nation^ 2 Bde., 1800 ; Hehraische Mythologie. 2 Bde., 
1820. 



494 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

in the life of Jesus, those prior to the Temptation, and those sub- 
sequent to the Crucifixion. Strauss thus only universalized a 
method which had been in partial operation before; made the 
myth, instead of a portal to enter and leave the Gospels, a com- 
prehensive name for the whole. In doing so it was not enough 
to build on old foundations. The enormous extension of the 
structure needed a corresponding extension of the base. The 
man could not but fail at the end whose Avork at the beginning 
was not simply ill done, but not done at all." ^ 

The position of Strauss is thus stated by himself: 

" The precise sense in which we use the expression mythus, 
applied to certain parts of the gospel history, is evident from all 
that has already been said ; at the same time the different kinds 
and gradations of the mythi which we shall meet with in this 
history may here by way of anticipation be pointed out. We 
distinguish by the name evangelical mytlms a narrative relating 
directly or indirectly to Jesus, which may be considered, not as 
the expression of a fact, but as the product of an idea of his 
earliest folloAvers : such a narrative being mythical in proportion 
as it exhibits this character. The mythus in this sense of the term 
meets us, in the Gospel as elsewhere, sometimes in its pure form, 
constituting the substance of the narrative, and sometimes as an 
accidental adjunct to the actual history. The pure mythus in the 
Gospel will be found to have two sources, which in most cases 
contributed simultaneously, though in different proportions, to 
form the mythus. The one source is, as already stated, the 
Messianic ideas and expectations existing according to their 
several forms in the Jewish mind before Jesus, and independently 
of him ; the other is that particular impression which was left by 
the personal character, actions, and fate of Jesus, and which 
served to modify the Messianic idea in the minds of his people. 
The account of the Transfiguration, for example, is derived almost 
exclusively from the former source ; the only amplification taken 
from the latter source being that they who appeared with Jesus 
on the mount spake of his decease. On the other hand, the 
narrative of the rending of the veil of the temple at the death of 
Jesus seems to have had its origin in the hostile position which 
Jesus, and his Church after him, sustained in relation to the 
Jewish temple worship. Here already we have something his- 
torical, though consisting merely of certain general features of 
character, position, etc. ; we are thus at once brought upon the 

1 A. M. Fairbairn, The Place of Christ in Modern Theology, 1893, pp. 
241-242. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 495 

ground of the Hstorical mytlius. The historical mythus has for 
its groundwork a definite individual fact, which has been seized 
upon by religious enthusiasm and twined around with mythical 
conceptions culled from the idea of Christ. This fact is perhaps 
a saying of Jesus, such as that concerning ' fishers of men ' or 
the barren fig-tree, which now appear in the Gospels transmuted 
into marvellous histories ; or, it is perhaps a real transaction or 
event taken from his life; for instance, the mythical traits 
in the account of the baptism wxre built upon such a reality. 
Certain, of the miraculous histories may likewise have had some 
foundation in natural occurrences, w^hich the narrative has either 
exhibited in a supernatural light or enriched with miraculous 
incidents. All the species of imagery here enumerated may justly 
be designated as mythi, even according to the modern and precise 
definition of George, inasmuch as the unhistorical which they 
embody — whether formed gradually by tradition or created by 
an individual author — is in each case the product of an idea. 
But for those parts of the history which are characterized by 
indefiniteness and want of connection, by misconstruction and 
transformation, by strange combinations and confusion — the nat- 
ural results of a long course of oral transmission; or which, on 
the contrary, are distinguished by highly coloured and pictorial 
representations, which also seem to point to a traditionary origin, 
— for these parts the term legendary is certainly the more appro- 
priate. Lastly. It is requisite to distinguish equally from the 
mythus and the legend that which, as it serves not to clothe 
an idea on the one hand, and admits not of being referred to 
tradition on the other, must be regarded«as the addition of the 
author, as purely individual, and designed merely to give clearness, 
connection, and climax to the representation. It is to the various 
forms of the unhistorical in the Gospels that this enumeration 
exclusively refers ; it does not involve the renunciation of the 
historical which they may likewise contain." ^ 

Strauss recognizes Ullmann ^ as his chief opponent, although 
many others from all sides attacked him. He was correct in 
his judgment. Ullmann states that the only thing new in 
Strauss was that he carried out in detail, more completely and 
strenuously, the mythical hypothesis which had long been held 
by others, in general or in some particulars.^ He shows that 
Strauss does not sufficiently distinguish between the canonical 

1 Strauss, TJie Life of Jesus, Eng. trans., Vol. I. pp. 85-87. 

2 Historisch oder Mythisch? 1838. M.c, s. 52. 



496 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and the apocryphal gospels, when he makes the former the first 
stage of mythical production, and the latter the second stage. ^ 
He urges that there is a middle way between the denial of the 
poetic, the legendary, and mythical elements altogether, and 
the extreme assertion of them by Strauss.^ He claims that 
the symbolic is a necessary clothing of the historical in the 
Christian as in all other religions ; that the histor}^ of the 
origin of the Christian religion must, in the very nature of 
the case, have a different character from that of other ordi- 
nary history ; that it was a new spiritual creation, in which 
the extraordinary and even the inexplicable occurs, and that 
it is accompanied with the religious enthusiasm of its adher- 
ents ; that the ideal of the divine and perfect everywhere pre- 
vails ; that there is a rich fulness of new ideas, a new life 
which clothes itself in the symbolical, the allegorical, and the 
highest poetry ; and that, from this point of view, the life of 
Jesus is a religious epic of the most glorious character.^ With 
a full recognition of all these elements, UUmann shows that 
there is no real myth in the life of Jesus as given us in the 
four Gospels. 

" This real historical point of unity of God and man, this com- 
plete presentation of the true life in a perfector of faith, must be 
given, if, in fact, a kingdom of God was to be founded and man- 
kind won for it. The Church must have a living head and a 
human exemplar ; it could be founded only, if an individual, who 
bore in himself the creative fulness of the divine life, was really 
there first of all, as the kernel and the root of the mighty growth 
which then spread itself out over all peoples." * 

The result of the contest as to the life of Christ introduced 
by Strauss was to show that, while there are poetical and sym- 
bolical elements in the canonical Gospels, there are no myths 
whatever. The New Testament uses the mythical element 
for illustration in the imagery of the apocalypse and in the 
exhortations of the Epistles.^ There are no real myths in the 
New Testament history, but only mythical germs which have 
been preserved and are used for illustrative purposes. 

U.c, s. 54. ^l.c.,s.GO. 3 ;.c., s. 73-7G. 

4Z.C., s. 85. 5 See pp. 333, 348. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 497 



VI. The Legendary Hypothesis 

In the discussions of the previous century it had been recog- 
nized by the Deistic, Atheistic, and Rationalistic assailants of 
the Bible that there was a large amount of legendary material 
in biblical history. Eichhorn, De Wette, and their pupils had 
also recognized it with sobriety and moderation ; but Renan, 
in 1863, was the first to apply the legendary theory rigorously 
for an explanation of the life of Jesus as recorded in the GosjdcIs. 

Renan states his position thus : 

" The historic value which I attribute to the Gospels is now, 
I think, quite understood. They are neither biographies, after 
the manner of Suetonius, nor fictitious legends like those of 
Philostratus ; they are legendary biographies. I would compare 
them with the legends of the Saints, the Lives of Plotinus, Proclus, 
Isidorus, and other works of the same kind, in which historic truth 
and the intention of presenting models of virtue are combined in 
different degrees. Inaccuracy, which is one of the peculiarities 
of all popular compositions, is especially perceptible in them. 
Suppose that ten or twelve years ago, three or four old soldiers 
of the empire had each sat down to write the life of JSTapoleon 
from memory. It is clear that their relations would present 
numerous errors and great discrepancies. One of them would 
put Wagram before Marengo ; another would write without hesi- 
tation that Napoleon drove the government of Robespierre from 
the Tuileries; a third would omit expeditions of the highest 
importance. But one thing would certainly be realized with a 
good degree of truth from these artless relations, — the character 
of the hero, the impression which he made upon those about him. 
In this view, such popular histories are better than formal, authori- 
tative history. The same thing may be said of the Gospels. 
Intent solely on setting prominently forth the excellence of the 
Master, his miracles and his teachings, the evangelists exhibit 
complete indifference to everything which is not the very spirit 
of Jesus. Contradictions as to times, places, persons, were re- 
garded as insignificant ; for, the higher the degree of inspiration 
attributed to the words of Jesus, the farther they were from 
according this inspira,tion to the narrators. These were looked 
upon simply as scribes, and had but one rule: to omit nothing 
that they knew." ^ 

1 Renan, The Life of Jesus. Eng. trans., N.Y., 1873, pp. 38, 39. 
2 k 



498 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Renan made the life of Jesus into a religious romance : and 
thereby reduced the legendary theory to an absurdity. His 
own book is the very best reply to his theory. The best his- 
torical critics recognize now as they did before, that there is 
legendary material in biblical history, in the New Testament 
as Avell as in the Old Testament ; but the legendary theory 
Avill not account for biblical history or any important part 
of it. 

The books of Strauss and Renan by the drastic application 
of their theories to the most sacred of all histories, the life of 
the Messiah and Saviour of men, did immense service to the 
cause of Historical Criticism ; not only by drawing the atten- 
tion of Christian scholars to the greatest of all persons and 
themes, but also by testing the mythical and legendary theories 
so fully as to lead to the verification by historical criticism of 
all the essential facts of the life of Jesus, and so establishing a 
basis for the testing in like manner of the entire field of bib- 
lical history. The work of Keim^ summed up all that was 
valuable in previous critical investigation. He took an inter- 
mediate position, such as had been suggested by Ullmann. He 
was full of ard^our for truth and right, and shows a genuine 
historical and scientific spirit. The more recent works of 
Weiss,^ Beyschlag,^ and Wendt* are built on his foundation. 
Many lives of Jesus have been published in Great Britain, 
America, and other countries which have been able, valuable, 
and useful ; but none of them has any independent scientific 
value when compared with the works above mentioned. 



VII. The Development Hypothesis 

More permanent contributions to the study of biblical history 
were made for the New Testament by the greatest of all modern 
Church historians, Ferdinand Christian Baur, who became the 

1 Geschichte Jesu von Nazara, 3 Bde., 1867-1872. 

2 Bas Lehen Jesu, 2 Bde., 1882. 3 Das Leben Jesu, 2 Bde., 1885-1886. 
4 Die Lehre Jesu, 2 Bde., 1886-1890. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 499 

founder and leader of the Tubingen School ; and for the Old 
Testament by Wilhelm Vatke, who founded no school and left 
no disciples, and who received due recognition only shortly 
before his death. Both of these scholars simultaneously in 
1835 applied the doctrine of development of the Hegelian 
philosophy to the study of biblical history. 

Baur took the position that the Pastoral Epistles represented 
the advocacy of the traditional doctrine and polity of the 
Church against Gnostics of the second century ; and he thus 
gained a foothold for tracing the origin of Christianity in the 
conflict of the two chief apostles, Saint Peter and Saint Paul, 
in the New Testament times, and in the ultimate reconciliation 
of their discixjles. His more developed theory appears in his 
later works. ^ All study of New Testament history and, indeed, 
of Church History since that date has depended upon the work 
of Baur. The chief opponent of Baur was Neander, who recog- 
nized several types of apostolic teaching reconciled in a higher 
unity. 2 About these two great historians most scholars rallied 
in all subsequent historical investigations. The chief pupils of 
Baur were Edward Zeller,^ Albert Schwegler,* and Karl Kost- 
lin.^ The more recent representatives of the school, such as 
Hilgenfeld,^ Volkmar,^ Holsten,^ and more especially Weiz- 
sacker^ and Pfleiderer,^^ have learned from the master, but 
pursue independent and fruitful investigations. The medi- 
ating school of Neander was represented by Dorner,ii Lechler,^^ 



1 Die sogenannten Pastoralbriefe, 1835 ; Paiilus, 1845 ; Lehrbuch d. christ- 
lichen Dogmengeschichte, 1847 ; Das Christenthum u. die christliche Kirche in 
den 3 ersten Jahrhunderten^ 1853. 

2 Seep. 578. ^ jyi^ ApostelgescMchte nach ihrem Inhalt icnd Ursprung^ 1854. 
* Das nachapostolische Zeitalter^ 1846. 

5 Essays in Theo. Jahrhucher, 1847-1850. 

6 Das Urchristenthums in den Hauptwendepunkten seines EntwicTcelungs- 
gauges^ 1855, 

' Die Beligion Jesu und ihre JEntwickelung, 1857 ; Jesus Nazarenus und die 
erste christliche Zeit, 1882. 

^ Zum Evangelium d. Paulus u. d. Petrus, 1867 ; Das Evangelium des 
Paulus, 1880. 

^ Das apostolische Zeitalter, 1886. lo Das TJr christenthum^ 1887. 

11 Entioicklungsgeschichte der Lehre von der Person Christi von den altesten 
Zeiten, 1839, 2te Aufl., 1845-1856 ; transl. in English, 1861-1863. 

12 Das apostolische und das nachapostolische Zeitalter, 1851, 3te Aufl., 1885. 



500 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

S chaff/ Fislier,2 Weiss,^ Beyschlag,* and many others who 
strove to use all the results of historical science and to con- 
struct a biblical history which should be alike altogether 
Christian and scientific. 

An intermediate and independent position was maintained 
by Hase, whose Life of Jesus and History of the Church pre- 
ceded the works of Strauss and Baur. He learned from both 
and all others, but did not move from his own foundation, 

Ritschl was an early adherent of the school of Baur, but he 
eventually broke with that school and advanced a new theory of 
apostolic history. In 1850 he came into conflict with Schwegler 
of the school of Baur in his interpretation of apostolic history, 
but it was not until 1857 that he broke with the master him- 
self.5 

The thesis of Ritschl was that Catholic Christianity is a defi- 
nite stage of the religious idea within the Gentile-Christian 
sphere, independent of the conditions of Jewish-Christian life 
and in contrast to the fundamental principles of Jewish Chris- 
tianity. Yet it is not merely dependent on the authority of 
Saint Paul, but bases itself on the authority of all the apostles, 
represented by Saint Peter and Saint Paul, as well as of the 
Old Testament and the discourses of Christ.^ , 

This thesis is an improvement upon Baur, as is recognized by 
most recent scholars,^ however much they may differ from the 
dogmatic principles of Ritschl and his school. 

Weizsacker, Pfleiderer, Harnack, and McGiffert are the chief 
writers upon apostolic history in recent times. They all build 
on Baur or Ritschl, or both. 

Harnack says: "Only one Gentile Christian, Marcion, under- 
stood Paul, and he misunderstood him. The others did not 
go beyond the appropriation of some particular Pauline teach- 

1 History of the Apostolic Church, 1851 (German) ; 1853 (Englisli) ; em- 
bodied in History of the Christian Church, Vol. I. 1882. 

2 The Beginnings of Christianity, 1877 ; History of Christian Doctrine, 1806. 
s Lehrhuch derhib. Theologie des N. T., 1868; Einleitung in das N. T., 1880. 
* Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments, 1866 ; Die christJiche Gemeindo- 

verfassung im Zeitalter der N. T., 1874; Neutestamentliche Theologie, 1891. 
^ Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, 1st Aufl., 1850 ; 2te Auli., 1857. 
« Alhrecht BitschVs Leben, Bd. I., 1892, s. 290. 
"' Pfleiderer, Die Entwicklung der Prot. Theologie, 1891, s. 284. 



HISTORY OE BIBLICAL HISTORY 501 

ings, and showed no understanding for the theology of the 
apostle, so far as there is shown in it the universalism of 
Christianity as a religion without recourse to moralism, and 
without explaining away the Old Testament religion." He 
holds that there are four chief tendencies in the apostolic times 
and not merely two, the Jewish- Christian and Gentile- Christian, 
namely : (1) The strictly Jewish, in which the Law must be 
scrupulously obeyed — Practical Particularism and Nomism. 
(2) The milder Jewish-Christian, in which the Jewish Chris- 
tians are required to fulfil the law, the Gentile Christians not, 
but the two liave to be kept apart — Practical Particularism ; 
Universalism in principle. (3) Neither Jew nor Gentile is any 
longer obligated to the Law. It has been done away with in 
Christ. Paulinism, Universalism in principle and practice, and 
Antinominanism. (4) Neither Jew nor Gentile is obligated to 
the ceremonial Laws, because these are only the shell of the 
spiritual and moral laws which have been fulfilled in the Gospel 
— Universalism in principle and practice, spiritualization, and 
limitation of the Law.^ 

This is logical ; but no sufficient evidence is given that it is 
historical. There is little doubt that there were four parties 
in the Apostolic Church, but there is no sufQcient evidence that 
they were in such sharp antagonism as this scheme would 
imply.2 

Harnack asserts that the Catholic Church of the second cen- 
tury cannot be explained as a development out of the theology 
of Paul or as a compromise between original apostolic concep- 
tions, and that it is necessary to call in the Hellenistic spirit, 
which began to stream into the Church before the close of the 
first century. 2 

Pfleiderer* criticises this view of Harnack as a reaction to 
the view of the older Protestant theologians, who regarded the 
ancient Church doctrine as a falling away from the apostolic.^ 

'^ DogmengescMcUte, 1886, L, s. 63-65; History o/ Do^ina, transl. from 3d 
German edition, 1895, I. p. 90. 2 gee pp. 586 seq. 

3 Dogmengeschichte, L, s. 41-42, ■^ Urchristeiithum, 1887, s. iv. 

^ " Ware also die hellenistische Denhiveise als solche schon eine VerkeJirung 
tier christlichen Wahrheit, loiejene Theologen voraszusetzen scheiJien, so wurde 
man zu derti seltsamen Schluss kommen mussen, dass die christliche llieologie 



502 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

It was the merit of Bruno Baur,i Hatcli,^ and Havet^ to liave 
called attention to the importance of the Greek element for the 
explanation of the rise of Christianity ; but to Harnack, more 
than to any one else, is due the working out of the theory. It 
may be questioned, however, whether he has not exaggerated 
it, and whether Pfieiderer does not more truly estimate the 
Greek influence when he represents that the Gentile Christians 
had already been prepared by the Greek spirit in Hellenistic 
Judaism for the reception of the teaching of Paul, and that the 
combination of Paulinism with it was natural and not of the 
nature of an apostasy or decline from original Christianity. 

If this representation of Harnack and his school is a true 
representation, then there is a discrepancy between the faith 
and life of the Apostolic Church and the major part of the 
writings of the New Testament. According to these histo- 
rians, the New Testament in the main represents the views 
of Saint Paul and his disciples ; for even the writings attrib- 
uted by tradition to Saint John and Saint Peter are assigned 
by them to the school of Saint Paul. This being so, few of 
the New Testament writings, and those the ones least used 
in the Church, represent the real faith and life of the apostolic 
age. Where, then, are we to find the teaching of the Twelve, 
who were trained by the Master Himself, and commissioned 
by Him, before He ascended to heaven, to be His witnesses, 
and to be the twelve foundations of the Christian Church? 
If we have not the teachings of Saint Peter and Saint James 
and Saint John — the pillars of the Church — in the New 
Testament, where are we to find them apart from the tradi- 
tions of the apostolic Sees and the results of their teaching in 
the faith and life of the local churches which they founded 
and taught ? But if this be so, the New Testament can no 
longer be regarded as the sole authoritative norm for the Chris- 
tian Church. It gives us for the most part only the norm of 
Pauline Christianity, which, as Harnack claims, the Church never 

hereits in ihren neittestamentUchen Anfdngen von der christlichen Wahrheit 
ahgef alien sei. Mit der unmoglichkeit dieses Schlusses hebt sich jene Theorie 
von selbst auf.''^ — I.e., s. iv.-v, ^ Christus und die Cdsaren, 1877. 

2 The Organization of the Early Christian Church, 1881. 

3 Le CJivistianisme.) 1884. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 503 

in fact followed, and which was only understood by Marcion, 
and by him misunderstood. The normal Christianity of the 
Twelve Apostles is not in the New Testament. If this position 
is the true one, Protestantism must lay aside the formal princi- 
ple of the Protestant Reformation and make a still more radical 
reformation under the guidance of the new interpretation of 
Saint Paul's Gospel, or else acknowledge that the Roman tradi- 
tion bears in it the true teaching of Saint Peter and the Twelve, 
by which even the New Testament and Saint Paul himself 
must be tested and explained. This theory of apostolic his- 
tory is in some respects an improvement upon its predecessors, 
in that it recognizes the real character of Catholic Christianity 
in the apostolic age, and makes it plain that Saint Paul did not 
dominate the faith and life of the apostolic age, as has been 
commonly supposed among Protestants.^ 

But the theory is defective in its interpretation of the Gospel 
of Saint Paul. He is not the antinomian that they represent him 
to be. They greatly exaggerate the Epistle to the Galatians as 
the norm of the theology of Saint Paul. This is all the more 
unreasonable in connection with the tendency at present to re- 
gard this epistle as the earliest of the epistles. The theory 
is also defective in its neglect of the elements of Saint Peter, 
Saint James, and Saint John in the New Testament. In 
fact there are four types of New Testament doctrine, all 
represented in the Now Testament ; and Catholic Christian- 
ity is a result of the harmonious combination of these types.^ 
Hellenistic Judaism, Palestinian Judaism, the Greek and the 
Roman world, each in its measure contributed elements of in- 
fluence for the constitution of the doctrine and life of the Apos- 
tolic Church ; but there is no sufficient evidence that any of 
them or all of them were able to impair the genuine apostolic 
types of teaching. 

1 " In dieser Beziehung hat das quantitative Verhaltniss der paulin. Literatur 
znm Ganzen unseres neutest. Kanon irref tilirend gewirkt, indem man die langste 
Zeit tiber auch den Beitrag, welchen der paulin. Lelirbegriff zum Glaubenstand 
der alten Kirche geliefert haben solltc, nacli demsclben Maasstabe abscbatzte. 
Und doch cin Mrchl. Gomeindebewusstsem, durch und durcli angefiillt mit der 
Gedankenwelt der Pis, zumal, am Anfange der gesanimten Enwickelung, eine 
reine Unmoglichkeit." — H. J. Holzmann, Lehrh. d. N. T. Theologie, 1897, 1., s. 
490, 491. 2 See pp. 538 seq. 



50J: STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

It is a common fault of all these later expositions of apos- 
tolic history that they exaggerate certain doctrines of Paul 
which they consider normal, and depreciate the importance of 
all others, and that they neglect to a large extent the events 
and facts of apostolic history as recorded in the New Testa- 
ment. They reverse the relative proportions of doctrine and 
life as found in the Gospels and book of Acts. 

The new impulse to the study of the Old Testament history 
given by Yatke produced little effect at the time. The school 
of Hengstenberg was zealous for traditional views of the his- 
tory, and Vatke's position was too theoretical and too little 
grounded in genuine literary or historical criticism to be con- 
vincing. The school of Hengstenberg reached its goal and 
end in Keil. Ewald,i in his massive work on Biblical History, 
organized the discipline in a scientific form and with extraordi- 
nary richness of material, gathered from the treasures of a life- 
time of study. Ewald recognized, with the insight of genius, 
the documentary, poetic, legendary, and even mythical sources 
in biblical history ; but he also saw the facts and events and 
truth that were involved in them. He hesitates, however, to 
use the term "myth" because, as he says, the Greek name 
" myth us " is inseparably connected with the entire nature of 
heathenism, and is not " Gottessage^^' but " Gottersage.'^ He 
prefers to use for the mythical element " heiliger oder besser 
Gottessage.^^ All subsequent work on the Old Testament his- 
tory is built on Ewald. The school of Ewald was represented 
in Great Britain by Stanley,^ whose work exerted a wide influ- 
ence, and had a wholesome effect. 

Julius Wellhausen first applied the development hypothesis 
of Vatke to the entire Old Testament history, and reconstructed 
it accordingly. 3 The most elaborate work in the same essential 
direction is the history of Stade.* The school of Ewald is still 
represented by the work of Kittel.^ Kent has recently pub- 

1 GescMchte d. Volkes Israel, 7 Bde., 3te Ausg., 1864-1868. 

2 History of the Jewish Church, 3 vols., 1863-1879. 

3 Wellhausen himself says: '■'■ Moine Untersuchung ist hreiter angelegt als 
die Grafs und ndhert sich der Art Vatke'^s von welchem letzteren ich anch das 
Mnste und Beste gelernt zu haben helcenne.'"' — GescMchte Israels, 1873, s. 11. 

4 GescMchte des Volkes Israel, 2 Bd., 1887, 1888. 
^' GescMchte der Hehrller, 1888-1892. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 505 

lished a brief liistoiy of the Hebrew people,^ in a true scientific 
spirit, but without the extravagance of Wellhausen and Stade. 
He may be classed with Kittel. All these recent scholars at- 
tempt to give us a history of Israel rather than a biblical history. 

A more conservative position has been taken by Kohler,^ who 
has yet not been able to escape severe criticism from the still 
more conservative men remaining in the German pulpits. 

An able work upon the history of the Jews was written by 
Gratz, a Hebrew scholar of the first rank, with an excellent 
historical sense and a rich gathering of material.^ 

The history of Jost * is chiefly devoted to the history of the 
Jews subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem, and is of 
little importance for biblical history. 

VIII. Advance in Several Departments of Biblical 

History 

In the meanwhile a new department of biblical history sprang 
into being, and had a rapid development. This was made neces- 
sary by the wonderful increase of the knowledge of ancient 
Greece and Rome, and more especially of the historic monu- 
ments of Egypt, Babylon, and Assyria. The first to organize 
this branch of history into a discipline was Schneckenburger. 
He defines the discipline in his posthumous lecture, 1862, as 
the Contemporaneous History, the historical frame for the his- 
tory, the outer ground on which it moves, or the history of the 
time in which the events occur. He limits himself to the New 
Testament, and divides his subject into two parts : (1) The 
state of affairs in the Roman Empire, especially with reference 
to religions. (2) Judaism of the New Testament times. ^ 

1 History of the Hehreio People, 1896. 

2 Lehrhuch der hiblischen GescMchte des A. T., 2 Bde., 1875 seq. 

^ GescMchte der Juden von den dltesten Zeiten his auf die Gegenwart, 11 Bde., 
2te Aufl., 1864-1870. 

* GescMchte des Judenthums, 3 Bde., 1857-1859. 

5 Schneckenburger, Vorlesungen uber Neutestamentliche ZeitgescMchte, 1862 : 
'■'■Die Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte ist zu unterscheiden von der Neutesta- 
rtientlichen GescMchte. Sie ist die gleichzeitige GescMchte, gleichsam der 
Mstorische Bahmen fur dieselbe, der ailssere Boden, auf loelchen sich die Neu- 
testamentliche GescMchte forthewegt, oder GescMchte der Zeit, in welcher die 
Neutestamentlichen Begebenheiten vorfielen.'''' 



506 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Bertheau^ had paved the way for this discipline in the Old 
Testament in 1842, in his dissertation on the inhabitants of 
Palestine from the most ancient times until the destruction 
of Jerusalem by the Romans. The contemporary history of 
the New Testament was further advanced by Hausrath,^ Eders- 
heim,3 and especially by Schiirer* and O. Holtzmann^ ; but no 
scholar has as yet organized this department for the Old Testa- 
ment, although a large amount of preparatory work has been 
done in the study of the archaeology and history of Babylonia, 
Assyria, Egypt, Phoenicia, Persia, and the other ancient nations, 
who were involved more or less in the history of Israel. 

Some of these workers have, by their sound judgment, care- 
ful sifting of the material, and scientific use of the methods of 
historical criticism, made important contributions to our know- 
ledge of the history of the Oriental nations and have thrown 
much light upon biblical history. Especially deserving of 
mention are : Schrader,^ George Smith,'^ Lenormant,^ W. Rob- 
ertson Smith,^ Francis Brown,i^ Ebers,^^ Erman,i2 Baudissin,^^ 
Baethgen,i4 Tiele,!^ McCurdy.i^ 

Others have discredited Oriental archaeology by hasty con- 
jectures, by unscientific methods of using their material, by 

1 Zur Geschichte der Israeliten^ 1842. 

2 Neutestamentliche ZeitgescJiichte, 3 Theile, 1868-1874. 

2 The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 2 vols., 1883, 
^ Lehrhuch der Neutestamentlichen Zeitgeschichte, 1874 ; Geschichte des 
Judischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, 1886-1890. 

5 Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 1895. 

6 Die Keilinschriften mid das A. T., 1872 ; 2te Aufl., 1883; translated into 
English, 2 vols., 1885-1886. 

■^ The Chaldean Account of Genesis^ 1876. 

8 The Beginnings of History according to the Bible and the Traditions of 
Oriental Peoples, translated from tlie 2d French ed., 1882. 

® Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, 1885 ; Lectures on the Beligion of 
the Semites, 1889. 

i*^ Assyriology, its Use and Abuse in Old Testament Study, 1885. 

11 Aegypten und die Bucher Moses, I., 1868. 

12 Aegypten und agypttisches Leben im Alte.rthum, 1885-1887 ; English ed., 1892. 

13 Studien zur semitischen Beligionsgeschichte, 1876-1878. 
1* Beitrdge zur semitischen Beligionsgeschichte, 1888. 

15 Gesch. V. d. Godsdienst., 1876 ; translated as Outlines of the History of Be- 
ligion, 3d ed., 1884 ; De vrucht der Assyriologie voor de vergelijkende geschiede- 
nis der Godsdiensten, 1877. 

16 History, Prophecy^ and the Monuments, 3 vols., 1894 seg. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 507 

unscrupulous striving for popularity, by the liasty publication 
of any possible illustration of biblical narratives or any pos- 
sible verification of biblical material. Among these may be 
mentioned : Vigouroux,^ Sayce,^ and Hommel.^ 

Biblical geography has been greatly advanced in the present 
century. Reland * summed up all previous knowledge of Pal- 
estine, and laid the foundations of the discipline in 1714. 
But Edward Robinson is the father of modern biblical geog- 
raphy. He made a personal investigation of the greater part 
of the Holy Land in two expeditions, the one in 1837, the other 
in 1852, and published the results in three monumental vol- 
umes.^ The most important systematic work on the subject 
was published by Carl Ritter,^ 1848-1855. 

The Avork of Robinson was followed up by Tobler,^ De 
Saulcy,^ Sepp,^ Guerin,i^ Stanley,^^ Tristram,^^ Merrill,!^ Wetz- 
stein,!* Palmer,!^ Arnaud,^^ Thomson,!^ Trumbull. i^ 

A new impulse to the study of biblical geography was given 
by the Palestine Exploration Societies, established in England, 
the United States, and Germany. The American society had 

1 La Bible et les decouvertes modernes^ 4 Tom., 3d ed., 1881. 

2 The Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments^ 1894 ; The Early 
History of the Hebrews^ 1897. 

3 The Ancient Hebrew Tradition, 1897. 

* Paloestina ex monumentis veteribus illustrata, 1714. 

^ Biblical Besearches in Balestine and in the Adjacent Begions, 3 vols., Bos- 
ton, 1841, 2d ed., 1860 ; Later Biblical Besearches in Palestine and in the Adja- 
cent Begions, 2d ed., 1857 ; Bhysical Geography of the Holy Land, 1865. 

6 Vergleichende Erdkunde der Sinaihalbinsel, von Palastina und Syrien, 
4 Bde., 1848-1855 ; trans, by Gage, 4 vols., 1866. 

■^ Bethlehem in Palastina, 1849 ; Golgotha, 1851 ; Die Siloaquelle, 1852 ; 
Zwei Bucher Topographic von Jerusalem, 2 Bde., 1853-1854; Dritte Wan- 
derung nach Palastina, 1857 ; Bitt durch Philistda, 1859 ; Nazareth, 1868 ; 
Bibliographia Geographica Palestince, 1867 ; Descriptiones Terroe SanctcB, 1874. 

^ Voyage en Terre Sainte, 2 Tom., Paris, 1865 ; Jerusalem, 1882, 

^ Jerusalem und das Heilige Land, 2 Bde., 2te Aufi., 1873-1876. 
1^ Description geographique, historique et archeologique de la Palestine, 3 
Tom., 1868-1880. 

11 Sinai and Palestine, in connection with their history, new ed., 1883. 

12 The Topography of the Holy Land, 1876 ; The Land of Israel, 2d ed. , 
1866 ; The Land of Moab, 1873. 

13 East of the Jordan, 1875-1877 ; new ed., 1883. 

1* Beisebericht ilber Hauran und die Trachonen, 1860. 

15 Desert of the Exodus, 1871. is La Palestine, 1868. 

17 The Land and the Book, 1864. is Kadesh Barnea, 1884. 



508 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

a brief life, but the English and German societies have had a 
long and fruitful life. The results of their researches appear 
from time to time in their journals.^ The English society has 
also published many volumes and maps, and has accomplished 
a complete survey of Western Palestine.^ 

In recent years the most valuable contributions have been 
made by Socin,^ George Adam Smith,^ and Gautier.^ 

IX. The Results of Historical Criticism 

It is safe to say that the Bible has become a new book to the 
modern scholar, as the result of all these historical studies and 
the researches of Historical Criticism. The material has been 
in large part sifted and has been scientifically arranged. The 
more external side of Biblical History has naturally received 
the greatest attention in recent years. More work has been 
done in Biblical History since 1835 than in all the previous 
centuries combined. The history of Israel has been distin- 
guished from the Contemporary History.^ It is now necessary 
to lift the more internal Biblical History into its high position 
and supreme importance.'^ 

Let any one compare the new Biblical History in its several 
branches with the Biblical History of thirty years ago, and he 
will not fail to notice that, to all intents and purposes, the Bibli- 
cal History we now have is new. 

The older history is full of traditional material which over- 
lays and overrides the real history contained in the Old Testa- 
ment. It fails to take account of the points of view of the 
parallel narratives of the chronicler and the prophetic histories. 
It does not distinguish the documents which underlie the 

1 Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statements, 1869 to date ; Zeit- 
schrift des Deutschen Paldstin. Vereins, 1876 to date ; Palestine Exploration 
Society Statements, 1871-1877. 

2 The Survey of Western Palestine, special papers, 1881 ; Arabic and Eng- 
lish Name Lists, 1881 ; Memoirs of the Typography, Orography, Hydrography, 
and Archceology, 3 vols., 1881-1883 ; The Fauna and Flora of Palestine, 1884, 

3 In several editions of Badeker's Paldstina und Syrien, 3d ed., 1891. 
* Historical Geography of the Holy Land, 1894. 

^ Souvenirs de Terre-Sainte, 1898. 

^ See p. 534. 7 See p. 538. 



HISTORY OF BIBLICAL HISTORY 509 

prophetic histories, and note the varying representations of the 
same events involved therein. It does not estimate the four 
great documents of the Hexateuch, and knows nothing of 
the development of Hebrew institutions and codes of law. 
It does not see the light which shines on the history in its 
different epochs from the prophets, the psalmists, and the sages. 
It treats all the legends and stories of the imagination as if they 
were narratives of real events. It overloads certain periods 
with a literature which does not belong to them, and thus 
lights them with illusive and delusive colours. It deprives 
other periods of the literature which belongs to them, and so 
makes biblical blanks. Cheyne has called attention to the very 
great difference between the David of the historical books and 
the traditional David interpreted by the Psalter.^ 

A still greater difference is to be found betAveen the history 
of the Exodus contained in the narratives of the Exodus and 
that same history when read with the variegated colours of all 
the institutions and laws of the Pentateuch. The exile, which 
has no historical narrative to unfold its lessons, is a time of 
dense darkness when tradition deprives it of its literature ; but 
when filled up with a literature which belongs to it, gathered 
about Ezekiel and the author of the Book of Comfort of Isaiah 
40-66, it is seen abounding in prophets and psalmists and sages 
and priestly scribes ; it becomes eloquent with historic mean- 
ing. There is truly a biblical blank, enduring for centuries, if 
we make the Canon close with Malachi and the history with 
the work of Nehemiah ; but if we see that a large portion of 
the literature of the Old Testament dates from the Persian, 
Greek, and Maccabean periods, all subsequent to the exile, and 
view the history in the light of this literature, the biblical blank 
has disappeared ; the gap of centuries is filled up, and the 
history of redemption goes right on in prophetic succession, in 
glorious continuity, until the advent of our Lord and Saviour. 

The history contained in the Old Testament has ever accom- 
plished its redemptive purpose by its sacred facts and lessons. 
But when that history has been taken from the sacred writings 
and worked up with ill-founded traditions and crude theories 
1 Aids to the Devout Study of Criticism, 1892, pp. 16 seq. 



510 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and speculations into those so-called biblical histories which 
have been used in our schools and families until the present 
time, we ought not to be surprised that the real biblical history, 
as disclosed by historical criticism, should differ still more from 
them than the modern histories of Greece and Rome, or even 
of Britain and America, differ from those used in the early 
years of our century. It makes an immense difference whether 
we look at the history of the Bible through the spectacles of 
tradition, or with the microscope of criticism ; whether we 
study it in the light of speculative dogma, or in the light of 
the ancient monuments of Assyria and Babylonia, of Egypt 
and of Palestine. It makes an immense difference whether we 
study it under the cloud of the pessimistic theory that it gives 
us a series of backslidings ; or in the sunshine of the knowledge 
that the whole history is the march of a redeemed nation under 
the banner of their King and their God, ever onward and for- 
ward toward the goal of redemption in the Messianic age. 
The pessimistic theory of biblical history which has so widely 
prevailed in Great Britain and America, and which still lingers, 
makes the times of the conquest of Palestine under Joshua and 
the subsequent barbaric times of the Judges, the Golden Age, 
from which all the rest of the history is a falling away into 
ever increasing sin and depravity. 

To the modern historical criticism of the Bible, the times of 
Samuel and David were higher and better than those of Moses, 
but the times of Hezekiah and Joshua were higher still. The 
Exile was a higher discipline and more productive of religious 
and moral teaching than the Exodus. The restoration under 
Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah vastly transcended the con- 
quest of Joshua and his successors. The Maccabees were 
greater heroes than the Judges, and the Maccabean age vastly 
richer in holy literature and in holy deeds. The older writers 
made biblical history a funeral march and the book of Lamen- 
tations its appropriate dirge. The newer criticism sees that 
biblical history is the victorious march of the kingdom of God, 
and the sixty-eighth psalm is its hymn. 



CHAPTER XXI 

THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 

The principles and methods of historical criticism when 
applied to Holy Scripture are essentially the same as those 
applied to all other historical documents. The older liistorical 
criticism was greatly hampered by its lack of knowledge of the 
documents. This was true when the great impulses of the 
modern historical criticism of biblical history was started. But 
now through the researches of the Higher Criticism the doc- 
uments have been in great measure correctly estimated and 
arranged. The poetic elements of the Bible have also for the 
most part been defined and separated. The history of Hebrew 
legislation is now quite well known. The chief work that his- 
torical criticism has still to do is to eliminate more carefully 
the myth and the legend, and to determine the historical ele- 
ments involved therein ; and then to study the historic material 
in order to determine its origin, its historical evolution and its 
results, its genuineness, and its reliability. There are thus 
three great departments of historical criticism : 1. Genesis of 
the material. 2. Genuineness. 3. Reliability. 

I. Genesis of Historical Material 

It is first necessary, as regards the biblical historical material, 
to determine, so far as possible, its genesis ; that is, its origin, 
its stages of development, and the changes that have taken 
place in this development. We have studied the question of 
integrity as applied to the documents ; ^ we have now to study 
it as regards the material contained in the documents. 

1 See pp. 92, 309 seq. 
511 



512 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 



1. Biblical Chronology 

The book of Genesis gives us a chronology of the antedilu- 
vians. There are three different statements of the numbers : 
that of the Massoretic text, that of the Samaritan codex, and 
that of the Septuagint version. We cannot determine the 
origin of these numbers ; but we may by a study of these ver- 
sions ascertain something about their development, and so work 
back toward their origin. It will be sufficient to cite two 
recent scholars. 

"Thus we have three different lengths assigned for the period 
from the creation of man to the Flood. The numbers of the 
Heb. text have generally been regarded as the original, although 
recently those of the Sam. have been defended by Dillmann and 
Budde. The LXX text, however, was accepted by the Hel. Jews 
and the early Christian Church, and has found defenders among 
certain Eng. scholars (Hales, Jackson, Poole, Rawlinson, and 
others), who have looked upon it with favour as furnishing a 
chronology more in accord with the antiquity of man than that 
of the Heb. text. But these numbers, whichever table may be 
regarded as the original, cannot, in any case, be accepted as 
historical, and hence for a real chronology of the early ages of 
man they are valueless. To accept them as genuine is to assume 
from the creation of man a degree of civilization high enough to 
provide a settled calendar and a regular registration of births 
and deaths, and the preservation of such records from the cre- 
ation of man to the time of the composition of Gn. All that 
is known of primitive antiquity is against such a supposition. 
The art of writing was not then known ; and however tenacious 
may have been the memory of man it is doubtful whether lan- 
guage then possessed the requisite terminology for the expression 
of such lapses of time. Man also has been upon the earth for a 
far longer period than that given even by the LXX chronology. 
The conjectural character of the table of Gn. 5 may be also rec- 
ognized from the variations of the three texts. Such liberties 
would probably not have been taken with figures supposed to rest 
upon authentic historical documents. The sacred writer chose the 
form of a genealogical table to represent the early period of the 
world's history. The number of the patriarchs, ten, is a common 
one in the lists of the prehistoric rulers or heroes of many peoples. 
It appears at once to be a suggestion from the ten fingers." ^ 

1 F. Brown, "Chronicles," in Dictionary of the Bible, 1898, Vol. I. p. 397. 



THE PRACTICE OE HISTORICAL CRITICISM 513 

^' It seems more candid and natural to admit that Israelite tra- 
dition, like the traditions of other races, in dealing with personages 
living in prehistoric times, assigned to them an abnormally pro- 
tracted period of life. Hebrew literature does not, in this respect, 
differ from other literature. It preserves the prehistoric tradi- 
tions. The study of science precludes the possibility of such 
figures being literally correct. The comparative study of litera- 
ture leads us to expect exaggerated statements in any work incor- 
porating the primitive traditions of a people." ^ 

Sayce is radical as usual. He says : " We can learn nothing, 
accordingly, from the books of the Old Testament about the 
chronology of Israel down to the time of David." ^ There is 
no justification for such an extreme statement. 

2. The History of the Chronicler 

The history of the Chronicler is based upon a midrash,^ or 
illustrative use, of the earlier history contained in the books 
of Samuel and Kings. We may thus trace the development of 
the historical material back from the Chronicler to the book of 
Kings, and then strip off the accretions of the Deuteronomic 
writers and find the original Judaic or Ephraimitic story. As 
to the historical value of the numbers and names of Chronicles, 
I shall quote Francis Brown, G. B. Gray, and E. L. Curtis. 

" The late date of Ch. presumably hinders it from being a his- 
torical witness of the first order. It could be so only if its sources 
were demonstrably such. But it has no sources certainly older 
than the canonical S. and K. ; its chief source is probably much 
later. An interval of 250 or 300 years separates it from the last 
events recorded in K. In all cases of conflict, then (see the 
examples above), preference must be given to S. and K. The 
obvious special interests of Ch. also (see above) are not to its 
advantage as a simple witness to facts. Intrinsic probability 
points the same way in many instances (see especially Comparison 
D, Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 16, 20, and Driver, Bertheau, 
Oettli; etc., on the passages) ; this holds true of the huge numbers 
of Ch. as well."^ 

1 Herbert Edward Ryle, The Early Narratives of Genesis, 1892, p. 87. 

2 The Early History of the Hebrews, 1897, p. 146. 
^ See pp. 329 seq. 

^ E. Brown, '■' Chronicles," in Dictionary of the Bible, 1898, Vol. I. p. 395. 
2l 



514 STUDY OE HOLY SCKIPTUEE 

"From the inaccuracy of some of the biblical numbers, and 
from the symmetry of their sum, it is not improbable that missing 
lengths of the reigns of some kings were supplied by conjecture, 
so as to make the duration of the N. kingdom 240 years, and the 
interval between the founding of the two temples 480 years. 
Such an arrangement would be helpful to the memory and analo- 
gous to reckonings of the early periods of the world and of Israel, 
and such an arrangement also finds a counterpart in the genealogy 
of Jesus in Mt., where the generations are reduced to three series 
of 14 each. But. taking the biblical data as a whole for this 
period, they do not present sufficient symmetry to be entirely or 
mainly artificial. Errors doubtless crept into lists of reigns, and 
the lengths of some probably were not preserved, and hence were 
supplied by conjecture." ^ 

" To summarize the bearing of the names on the question of the 
Chronicler's sources : to a certain extent, though a comparative 
small one, the Chronicler availed himself, directly or indirectly, 
of trustworthy sources of early periods now no longer extant ; this 
is most conclusively shown by the personal genealogies of 1 Chr. 
234-41^ g33-4o^ 2ess couclusivcly suggested by other passages, e.g. 

1 Chr. 27^"^^; but in many cases his sources were thoroughly un- 
historical, e.g. in 1 Chr. 4^^^^, and, if he is there dependent on a 
source at all, in 1 Chr. 24-27 (except 2T^'^)."^ 

3. The Warning of Saint Peter 

The Gospels give several reports as to the naming of Saint 
Peter. Saint Mark gives an account of the appointment of the 
Tv^elve. The first name that appears is " Simon he surnamed 
Peter." ^ In the Gospel of Matthew this passage of Saint Mark 
is used and is given as " The first, Simon, who is called Peter."* 
In the Gospel of Luke it is also cited in the form, " Simon, whom 
he also named Peter." ^ Saint Luke agrees with Saint Mark. 
If we depended on these two Gospels alone, it would be most 
natural to suppose that Jesus gave Simon the name Pgter when 
the Twelve were appointed. But Matthew modifies the state- 
ment of Luke in order to make it consistent with its report of 
the naming of Saint Peter which, according to it, took place 

IE. L. Curtis, "Chronology of Old Testament," in the Dictionary of the 
Bible, 1898, Vol. I. p. 403. 

2 G. Buchanan Gray, Studies in Hebrew Proper Names, 1896, p. 242. 
8 Mk. 316. 4 Mt. 102. 5 Lk. 61^ 



THE PRACTICE OE HISTORICAL CRITICISM 515 

at a much later date in connection with Saint Peter's recogni- 
tion of Jesus as the Messiah. 

"And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, 
Simon Bar-Jonah : for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto 
thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I also say unto 
thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my 
church ; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I 
wdll give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven : and what- 
soever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and 
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." ^ 

These words of Jesus to Saint Peter are given only in 
Matthew. They are inserted in a narrative which Matthew 
and Luke both derive from Mark, and therefore must be 
regarded as coming from the author of our Gospel of Matthew. 
The question then arises, where did it get this word of Jesus ? 
But before this question is discussed, we have to notice that 
the naming of Saint Peter by Jesus is given by John in still 
another connection, namely, when Saint Andrew, the disciple 
of Saint John the Baptist, brings him to Jesus. 

" One of the two that heard John speak, and followed him, was 
Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. He findeth first his own brother 
Simon, and saith unto him. We have found the Messiah (which 
is, being interpreted, Christ). He brought him unto Jesus. Jesus 
looked upon him, and said. Thou art Simon, the son of John : 
thou shalt be called Cephas (which is by interpretation, Peter)." ^ 

It is evident that the Gospels give three entirely different 
times in which the naming occurred. There was no fixed 
tradition as to the exact time. Mark and Luke are against the 
time of Matthew, and all three against the time of John. They 
all agree, however, in the fact of the naming. 

The story of John seems to belong to the original Hebraistic 
source of the Gospel. The Aramaic Messiah and Cephas are 
explained by the Greek terms Christ and Peter. 

The preceding recognition of Jesus as the Messiah is common 
to this narrative and to Matthew. Such a recognition is in- 
credible at so early a date as John gives it. It is more appro- 
priate at the date when Matthew gives it. Such a recognition 

1 Mt. 1617-19. 2 John 140-42, 



516 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

at the later date is confirmed by Luke, and especially by Mark. 
The date of Matthew and the circumstances given by Matthew 
are more probable. But it is by no means certain that the 
naming occurred at so early a date as Matthew gives for it. 
It is difficult to understand why Mark and Luke should not 
have mentioned it in that connection. The words of Jesus, 
according to Matthew, bear on their face the traces of later 
conceptions. It is quite certain that Jesus said, ''my Father," 
and "kingdom of God," and not "my Father which is in 
heaven," or "kingdom of heaven," both of which expressions 
are peculiar to Matthew.^ It is extremely probable that Jesus 
did not use the Aramaic equivalent for " ecclesia " = church, 
and that Pauline ^ influence is responsible for the substitution 
of " church " for an original word of Jesus, which was probably 
"kingdom," or "house." This is more consistent with the 
opposing " gates of Hades," the imagery of building on a rock, 
and the use of " keys " ; and also with the subsequent use of the 
imagery by Saint Peter and Saint Paul.^ It seems altogether 
probable that underlying the Word, as our Matthew gives it, 
is a logion, and that the author of the Gospel derived it from 
the Logia, and gave it the place in the Gospel which seemed 
to him most appropriate. There is no safe clue for the date 
of the naming, but the naming itself is made certain by the 
three stories relating to it, Avhich are so discrepant as to show 
independent historical sources. The Word given by Matthew 
stands alone without external support ; but if a logion really un- 
derlies it, the substance of the Word is sustained by the prim- 
itive Logia of Saint Matthew. And the substance of the logion 
is also sustained by the intrinsic meaning of the word Cephas, 
Peter, and the consistency of the name with his historic posi- 
tion as the primate of the apostles, not only during the ministry 
of our Lord, but also in the apostolic age of the Church. 

1 See Briggs, Messiah of Gospels, pp. 78-79, 198, 203. 

2 See Briggs, Messiah of Gospels, pp. 190 seq. 

3 1 Pet. 24 ««<?•; Eph. 220-22. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 517 

4. The Speaking with Tongues at Pentecost 

The great importance of this phase of historical criticism 
justifies another illustration taken from the book of Acts ; 
namely, the story of the speaking with tongues at Pentecost. 
I shall first quote McGiffert. 

" From various passages in the New Testament we learn that 
a peculiar gift, known as the ' gift of tongues/ was very widely 
exercised in the apostolic church, and the fourteenth chapter of 
Paul's Pirst Epistle to the Corinthians makes the general nature 
of the gift sufficiently plain. It was evidently the frenzied or 
ecstatic utterance of sounds ordinarily unintelligible both to 
speakers and to hearers, except such as might be endowed by the 
Holy Spirit with a special gift of interpretation.^ The speaker 
was supposed to be completely imder the control of the Spirit, to 
be a mere passive instrument in his hands, and to be moved and 
played upon by him. His utterances were not his own, but the 
utterances of the Spirit, and he was commonly entirely uncon- 
scious of what he was saying. He was not endowed with the 
power to speak in foreign tongues; his words were divine, not 
human words, and had no relation whatever to any intelligible 
human language. It was not unnatural, therefore, that the speaker 
should appear demented to an unbelieving auditor, as Paul implies 
was not infrequently the case.^ But his ecstatic utterances, in- 
spired ^s it was believed by the Holy Ghost, were regarded by 
his fellow-Christians as spiritual utterances in an eminent sense. 
The ' speaking with tongues ' constituted, in the opinion of a large 
part of the church, the supreme act of worship, — the act which 
gave the clearest evidence of the presence of the Spirit and of the 
speaker's peculiar nearness to his God. No other gift enjoyed 
by the early church so vividly reveals the inspired and enthusi- 
astic character of primitive Christianity. It was apparently this 
^gift of tongues' with which the disciples were endowed at Pente- 
cost, and they spoke, therefore, not in foreign languages, but in 
the ecstatic, frenzied, unintelligible, spiritual speech of which 
Paul tells us in his First Epistle to the Corinthians. That the 
Pentecostal phenomenon is thus to be regarded not as something 
unique, but as the earliest known exercise of the common gift of 
tongues, is rendered very probable by the lack of all reference to 
it in other early sources ; by the absence of any hint that the 
disciples ever made use in their missionary labours, or indeed on 

1 1 Cor. 1210. 2 1 Cor. 1423. 



518 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

any other occasion than Pentecost itself, of the miraculous power 
to speak in foreign languages ; by the effect produced by the phe- 
nomenon upon some of those present, who accused the speakers 
of intoxication, and by the fact that it is treated as a fulfilment 
of the prophecy of Joel, who says nothing of ' other tongues,' but 
characterizes the Messianic Age as an age of revelation and of 
prophecy. But the most decisive argument is to be found in 
Peter's discourse, which constitutes our most trustworthy source 
for a knowledge of what actually occurred. ISTowhere in that dis- 
course does he refer to the use of foreign languages by his fellow- 
disciples, not even when he undertakes to defend them against 
the charge of drunkenness, though it would certainly have con- 
stituted a most convincing refutation of such a charge." ^ 

There are in the narrative three stages of explanation of the 
phenomena. 1. The first, from the original Hebraistic written 
source, represents those upon whom the Spirit came as speak- 
ing with tongues in the ecstatic state, just as in the two other 
narratives of the gift of the Spirit reported in the book of 
Acts : ^ some of them spake with their tongues without human 
speech ; others interpreted the tongues, and spake of the great 
works of God to those about them. 

2. The second stage is the speech of Saint Peter, which 
interprets the event as in accordance with the previous story, 
but which lays stress upon prophetic speaking with tongues in 
intelligent speech in fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel. 

3. The third stage advances upon the interpretation in the 
sermon of Saint Peter, and neglects that phase of speaking 
with tongues w^hich Saint Paul describes as the interpretation 
of tongues, and which was in the mind of the original narrator 
as well as of Saint Peter in his discourse ; and it interprets the 
speech as in a great many different languages. 

The speaking with tongues in the form, both of unintelligible 
speech and of its interpretation, is sustained by many allusions 
in the New Testament as entirely historical, and is psycho- 
logically and ph3'sically probable. But the speaking in many 
different languages unknown before is not only psychologically 
and physically incredible, but it has little historic support in 

1 McGiffert, A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, 1897, pp. 50-52. 

2 Acts 1044-47, 196. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 519 

the later and unsupported interpretation of the ancient docu- 
ments by the author of our book of Acts. 

II. GEiN^UINEKESS OF HISTORICAL MATERIAL 

We have also studied the question of genuineness of docu- 
ments.^ We have now to study it in connection with facts 
and events. We have to consider under this head what was 
the design of the one who furnished the material, or from whom 
it originally came. Was his purpose to give us fact or fiction ; 
to tell us the truth, or to deceive us by a forgery of lies ; or 
was he careless as to truth and fact, and only intent upon 
enlisting interest and giving instruction ? Under this head we 
have to consider the forgery, the myth, the legend, the fiction, 
and the historical fact. 

1. The Historicity of Daniel 

The stories of the book of Daniel, as written in a book that 
bears the name of Daniel as a pseudonj^m,^ raises the question 
whether the author meant to deceive his readers by forging^ 
unliistorical tales. Such a forging of tales to deceive is opposed 
(1) by the fact that the book of Daniel throughout breathes 
the spirit of truth and righteousness, and encourages fidelity 
to God and His kingdom, even to the utmost limits of martyr- 
dom ; (2) by the fact that the author, in using the pseudonym 
of an ancient worthy, is doing nothing more than to use a 
common literary artifice, which has never been regarded as 
dishonest. It was transparent to his original readers, and 
only his readers in later generations have confounded him with 
the real Daniel. (3) It is a fact that the stories bear upon 
their faces the characteristics of historical fiction, and were 
doubtless so received in the times when they were written.^ 
These stories about Daniel were subsequently enlarged by 
others still less historical in the tales of Bel and the Dragon, 
and of Susanna. But even the extravagance of these tales did 
not stay later generations from regarding them as historical. 

1 See pp. 317 seq. 2 gee pp. 323 seq. 3 See pp. 351 seq. 



520 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

No one has ever succeeded in pointing to a single biblical 
narrative or story in which there was the intent to deceive, or 
in which there is the slightest evidence of a forgery. 

2. Erroneous Historical Statements 

There are, however, many instances in which a biblical writer 
has, owing to lack of sources and dependence on local tradi- 
tions, been led into erroneous historical statements. H. G. 
Mitchell reviews the statement of the book of Kings Avith 
regard to the destruction of Sennacherib's army thus : 

"One would naturally infer from 2 K. 19^ that Sennach- 
erib's army was almost completely annihilated by the angel of 
Jehovah, and that he himself escaped only to be assassinated by 
two of his sons soon after his return to Nineveh. This, however, 
was not the case. In the first place, although, as one can read 
. between the lines of his own statements, he was obliged to 
abandon his plan for the conquest of Egypt, his expedition was 
so far successful that he retained his hold on the region actually 
overrun, and prevented Tirhaka from getting possession of it. 
Secondly, he lived after his return no fewer than twenty years, 
and conducted several successful campaigns, one of which was 
directed against Edom and the Arabs on its border. Finally, in 
681 B.C., he was succeeded by his son Esarhaddon; but upon that 
date (686) Hezekiah had been succeeded by Manasseh, and Isaiah 
also had probably finished his labors." ^ 

I know of no one who so frequently questions the historical 
accuracy of statements in the biblical writings as Sayce. This 
is all the more remarkable that he poses before the public as a 
defender of the historicity of the Bible against "higher critics." 
In fact, he is defending his pet theories, and he does not hesi- 
tate to discredit biblical statements, to a rash and to an extreme 
degree, whenever the Holy Scripture obstructs him. Thus he 
questions the naming of Jacob. 

"The etymology, however, is really only one of those plays 
upon words of which the biblical writers, like Oriental writers 
generally, are so fond. It has no scientific value, and never was 
intended to have any. Israel is, like Edom, not the name of an 
individual, but of the people of whom the individual was the 

1 Isaiah^ p. 43. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 521 

ancestor. The name is formed like that of Jacob-el, and the abbre- 
viated Jeshurun is used instead of it in the Song of Moses. If 
the latter is correct, the root will not be sdrdh, 'he fought,' or 
ydsar, 'he is king,' but ydshar, 'to be upright,' 'to direct'; and 
Israel will signify ' God has directed.' Israel, in fact, will be the 

* righteous' people who have been called to walk in the ways of 
the Lord." ^ 

Many examples might be given of Sayce's lack of appreciation 
of the genuine principles of historical criticism. It is not so 
much that one objects to his results. All scholars make mistakes, 
and occasional mistakes are pardonable to accurate scholars. But 
Sayce's historical criticism is seldom more than mere speculation. 
Thus he makes the statement : " The poets and later writers of 
the Old Testament came to forget what was meant by ' the sea.' 
It was confounded with Yam Suph, and the scene of the Exodus 
was accordingly transferred from the Gulf of Suez to the Gulf of 
Akaba. It is in the song of triumph over the destruction of the 
Egyptians that the confusion first makes its appearance. Here 
(Ex. 15*) ' the sea ' and ' the Yam Suph ' are used as equivalents, 
and the contents of the song are summed up at the end in the 
statement that ' Moses brought Israel from the Yam Suph.' But 
elsewhere in the Pentateuch the geography is accurate, and it is not 
until we come to the speeches in the book of Joshua that the two 
seas are once more confused together. The same geographical 
error is repeated in two of the later Psalms, as well as in a pas- 
sage of the book of ISTehemiah." ^ 

" We must, then, look to the frontiers of Edom and the desert 
of Paran for the real Sinai of Hebrew history. But it is useless 
to seek for a more exact localization until the mountains of Seir 
and the old kingdom of Edom have been explored. Then, if ever, 
the Sinai of the Pentateuch may be discovered. It would seem 
that it formed part of a range that was known as 'Horeb,' the 

* desert' mountains, and as late as the age of Elijah it was still 
reverenced as ' the Mount of God ' (1 Kings 19^)." ^ 

We could not refuse to accept this assertion of abundant 
errors in Holy Scripture as regards the sea and Mount Sinai, 
if it were supported by facts and established by genuine his- 
torical criticism. But the brief discussion of the subject in the 
context of the passages cited is entirely uncritical and is mere 
theorizing. 

1 Sayce, The Early History of the Hebrews, pp. 73-74. 

2 Z.c, pp. 183-184. * 3 Z.C., p. 189. 



522 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

3. The Myth 

We have already seen ^ that sober historical critics do not 
hesitate to recognize mythical elements in Holy Scripture ; 
although many hesitate to use the term for fear lest they may 
be understood to imply thereby polytheistic elements in the 
Bible, or a confounding of God with man and nature. There 
can be no doubt that there are mythical stories in the apocry- 
phal gospels, relating to Jesus, especially in the story of the 
infancy. 

This one may suffice for an example : 

" Now when the Lord Jesus had completed seven years from his 
birth, on a certain day, he was occupied with boys of his own age, 
for they were playing among clay, from which they were making 
images of asses, oxen, birds, and other animals, and each one 
boasting of his skill, was praising his own work. Then the Lord 
Jesus said to the boys, ^ The images that I have made I will order 
to walk.' The boys asked him whether then he were the son of 
the Creator ; and the Lord Jesus bade them walk. And immedi- 
ately they began to leap ; and then when he had given them leave 
they again stood still. And he made figures of birds and spar- 
rows, which flew when he told them to fly, and stood still when 
he told them to stand, and ate and drank when he handed them 
food and drink. After the boys had gone away, and told this to 
their parents, their fathers said to them, ^ My sons, take care not 
to keep company with him again, for he is a wizard ; flee from him 
therefore and avoid him, and do not play with him again after 
■ this.' "2 

There is nothing of the kind in the canonical Gospels. The 
virgin birth of our Lord, and the story of the Incarnation as 
cited in the Gospel of the Infancy in Matthew and Luke, are 
more exposed to the mythical hypothesis than any others in the 
Gospels. It is represented that the virgin birth is unknown 
to the primitive Gospels of Saint Mark and the Logia of Saint 
Matthew ; or to the epistles, even when they urge the doctrine 
of the Incarnation ; or to the Gospel of John ; that the sources 
used by our Matthew and Luke are poetic in form and in con- 

1 See pp. 495 seg., 504. 

2 Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, 36. See in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 
p. 412. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 523 

tent, and of unknown origin ; that the description of the virgin 
birth as given by them conflicts with physical science and psy- 
chology; and that their story resembles the myths of other 
ancient religions. 

These reasons must be candidly considered by all those who 
desire to attain certainty as to the immaculate conception and 
the virgin birth of our Lord. I think they may all be sincerely 
met and entirely overcome. 

1. The story as given by our Matthew and Luke does not 
come from these writers, but from their sources. They briefly 
remark upon it and interpret it, but they do not materially 
change it. These sources are poetic in form and also in sub- 
stance, and have all the characteristics of Hebrew poetry as to 
parallelism, measurement of lines, and strophical organization. 

They evidently came from a Jewish-Christian community 
and not from Gentile Christians. They were therefore ancient 
sources, different from and yet to be classed with the Gospel 
of Saint Mark and the Logia of Saint Matthew, rather than 
with our Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John. 

2. We have to take account of the poetic clothing of the 
story. The piece cited by Matthew is : 

Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife : 
For that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit. 
And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call His name Jesus ; 
For it is He that shall save His people from their sins.i 

We know not how much more extensive this piece of poetry 
was, but it implies all that the evangelist says in his context; 
namely, that the virgin bride of Joseph was found to be with 
child, and that he recognized that the child was begotten not 
by him but by the Divine Spirit. The evangelist may or may 
not be mistaken in the translation and in his interpretation 
of the predictions of Isaiah ;2 or he may use it as a suitable 
embodiment of his thought. Whatever opinion one may form 
on this subject, it does not affect the main question: that 
Matthew used a poetic source for this story and interprets it, 
just as he used the Gospel of Saint Mark and the Logia of Saint 
Matthew, and frequently interpolated them with interpretations 

1 Mt. 120-21. 2 Mt. 122-23 ; Jg. 714. 



524 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

also. There is a larger use of poetic sources in Luke. Indeed, 
it gives a series of beautiful canticles to tell us the story of the 
Forerunners and the birth of Jesus, with comments of its own. 
The chief of the poetic extracts used by Luke is the follow- 
ing: 

The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, 

And the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee : 

Wherefore also that holy thing that is to be born 

Shall be called the Son of God. 

And behold, Elizabeth thy kinswoman. 

She also hath conceived a son in her old age : 

And this is the sixth month with her that was called barren : 

For no word from God shall be void of power. — Lk. 135-37, 

The virgin conception of Jesus, as here announced by the 
archangel, is not to be interpreted as if it were a miracle in 
violation of the laws of nature, but rather as brought about by 
God Himself present in theophany. The conception of Jesus 
in the womb of the Virgin Mary differs from all other concep- 
tions of children by their mothers, in that there was no human 
father. The place of the human father was taken by God Him- 
self ; not that God appeared in theophany in human form to 
beget the child, after the analogy of the mythologies of the 
ethnic religions; but that God in a theophany, in an extraor- 
dinary way unrevealed to us, and without violation of the laws 
of maternity, impregnates the Virgin Mary with the holy seed. 
The words of the angel imply a theophanic presence ; for though 
it might be urged that the coming of the Spirit upon her was 
an invisible coming after the analogy of many passages of the 
Old Testament, yet the parallel statement that the divine power 
overshadowed her cannot be so interpreted. For it not only 
in itself represents that the divine power covered her with a 
shadow, but this is to be thought of after the uniform usage of 
Holy Scripture as a bright cloud of glory, hovering over her, 
resting upon her, or enveloping her with a halo of divinity, in 
the moment when the divine energy enabled her to conceive 
the child Jesus. ^ 

1 The same verb, eTricrKtd^o}, is used in the Septuagint of Ex. 40^^^ ^i^i^ refer- 
ence to the cloud of glory of the Tabernacle, and also to the theophanic cloud of 
the Transfiguration in Mt. 17^ = Mk. 0^ = Lk. O^*. The cloud of glory is always 
connected with God, and implies more than the agency of the Divine Spirit. 



THE PRACTICE OE HISTORICAL CRITICISM 525 

This representation is based upon the well-known pillar of 
cloud lighted with divine glory, of the story of Exodus,^ and of 
the erection of Solomon's temple. ^ The entrance of God into 
His tabernacle and temple to dwell there in a theophanic cloud 
would naturally suggest that the entrance of the divine life 
into the virgin's womb to dwell there would be in the same 
form of theophanic cloud. The earthly origin of Jesus in the 
virgin's womb would thus begin with a theophany, just as the- 
ophanies accompany His birth, His baptism, His transfigura- 
tion. His crucifixion, and His resurrection. 

This annunciation represents the conception of Jesus as due 
to a theophany. It does not state the doctrine of His preexist- 
ence, although that doctrine is a legitimate inference. It rep- 
resents an early stage of New Testament Christology. It does 
not go a step beyond the Paulinism of the epistles to the 
Corinthians. 

This annunciation knows nothing of the incarnation of the 
Logos, of the prologue of the Gospel of John ; ^ or of the Son 
of man from heaven, of the Gospel itself;* or of the effulgence 
of the glory of God, of Hebrews;^ or of the firstborn of all 
creation, of Colossians;^ or of the epiphany of the Messiah, of 
2 Timothy;'' or of the Kenosis, of Philippians;^ but represents 
an earlier Christology than any of these writings. Holzmann^ 
truly states that Eom. 1^, 8^, Gal. 4^ do not imply a virgin 
birth, but may be interpreted of a birth of Joseph and Mary, in 
accordance with the reference to Joseph as the father of Jesus 
in the primitive Gospels. But, as Schmiedel shows, ^"^ the epis- 
tles to the Corinthians teach an early stage of the doctrine of 
the preexistence of Jesus in the second Adam from heaven, ^^ 
and the head of humanity, ^^ of 1 Corinthians ; and especially in 
the self-impoverishment of the rich Messiah, of 2 Corinthians. ^^ 
This more primitive form of the doctrine of the preexistence of 
the Messiah is still in advance of the doctrine of this annun- 
ciation. This annunciation of a theophanic birth is really a 

1 Ex. 4034-35 ; Nu. 915. 4 John 313. 7 2 Tim. l^. 

2 1 K. 810-11. 5 Heb. 13. 8 pho. 26-8. 

3 John 114. G Col. 115. 9 DiQ SynoptiTcer, s. 532. 
i'^ Die Briefe an die Thess. \md an die Korinther, s. 168. 

11 1 Cor. 1545-47. 12 1 Cor. 113. is 2 Cor. 89. 



526 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

simpler conception and one more in accordance with the repre- 
sentations of the Old Testament than the sending of the Son 
of God, born of a woman, of the epistles to the Romans ^ and 
Galatians.2 It is true that none of these passages teach a 
virgin conception and birth; but they teach or imply more 
than the virgin birth, namely, the preexistence of the Messiah 
before His entrance into the world. ^ 

Thus I explained the story in its connection in 1894. I shall 
only add that the doctrine of the preexistence of the Messiah 
and the doctrines of the Kenosis, of Saint Paul, and the in- 
carnation, of the Prologue of John, are more difficult doctrines 
than the doctrine of the virgin birth. If the preexistent Mes- 
siah was to enter the world and become a man, what was the 
most natural and reasonable and divine way of doing it? 
Would He enter and take possession of a full-grown man, as, 
for example, the human Jesus at His baptism? The ancients 
who taught this were regarded rightly as heretics. Would 
He enter and take possession of a boy or an infant after birth ? 
Or would He clothe Himself in an unconscious foetus in the 
womb of a mother? 

It is only sufficient to raise these questions in order to be 
pressed back by an inevitable necessity of logical consistency 
from every kind of dualism, such as would be involved in any 
other mode of incarnation except the one described in the story 
of the virgin birth ; namely, the theophanic entrance of the pre- 
existent Christ into the womb of the virgin as the primal germ 
of a living individual. It does not seem incredible that He, 
who is immanent, omnipresent, and omnipotent, should concen- 
trate His real presence, for His work on earth as the Messiah, in 
the womb of a virgin ; and there is no violation of physiology 
or psychology if that concentrated presence should assume the 
form of the first beginning of a human organism and attach 
itself for substance and growth to the maternal springs of vital 
energy. 

1 Rom. 83. 2 Gal. 4*. 

3 Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, pp. 48-51. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 527 

4. Legends 

We have seen that the best Christian scholars recognize that 
there are legends in Holy Scripture.^ The only question is as 
to the number and extent of them, and the way in which we 
may distinguish them from the reality that underlies them. 
There can be no doubt that the story of Jannes and Jambres 
used in the Second Epistle to Timothy ^ is such a legend. Few 
find difficulty in recognizing that; but what shall we say as 
regards the story of the angel stirring the waters, in the Gospel 
of John in the Authorized Version ? ^ The Revised Version 
omits this story, although it gives it on the margin as contained 
in many ancient authorities. There can be little doubt that it 
is a legend which crept into some ancient texts. 

The Revised Version also brackets the story of the woman 
taken in adultery, and states on the margin that " most of the 
ancient authorities omit John 7^^-8^^. Those which contain it 
vary much from each other." This is a beautiful story, and 
there is nothing in it that seems unnatural or inconsistent with 
the character and teachings of Jesus. Indeed, it is a story that 
is a favourite among manj^ who would gladly reject other parts 
of the Gospels as mythical or legendary. And yet, while it 
may be a true story, it is probably a legend. 

Some have thought that the stories of the dream of Pilate's 
wife * and the washing of Pilate's hands ^ are legendary. They 
are peculiar to Matthew. This Gospel has inserted them in 
the midst of the narratives derived by it from Saint Mark. 
They are just the sort of things of which legends are made. 
The Gospel according to Peter adds to the washing of Pilate's 
hands the statement : " But of the Jews none washed his hands, 
neither Herod nor any one of His judges. And when they 
wished to wash them Pilate rose up." ^ The question, whether 
such incidents are legendary or not, does not in the slightest 
degree impair the holy character of the Bible or the particular 
narrative, or in any way discredit the genuineness of the great 
historic facts of the religion and faith of the Bible. 

1 See pp. 335 seq. 2 2 Tim. 38. 3 John 53-4. 4 Mt. 27i9. 

5 Mt. 2724b-25, 6 11 . Robinson and James, Gospel according to Peter, p. 16. 



528 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The question whether a statement is historical or legendary 
is not decided by the fact that it is written in Holy Scripture. 
So soon as we see clearly that the holy writers used legends 
for holy purposes, as well as history, we may leave it to his- 
torical criticism to determine whether the statement is legen- 
dary or not. But historical criticism must be used with 
reverence and caution. I shall give an example of irreverent 
and incautious criticism of a biblical narrative such as should 
be avoided. 

" Moses was met by Aaron ' in the mount of God/ and the two 
brothers returned to Egypt together, determined to deliver Israel 
from its bondage, and to lead it to that sacred mountain whereon 
the name of its national God had been revealed. Unlike Sinuhit 
Moses took with him his Midianitish wife and the children she 
had borne him. At this point in the narrative there has been 
inserted the fragment of a story which harmonizes but ill with it, 
or with the general spirit of Old Testament history. The anthro- 
pomorphizing legend, that ' the Lord ' met Moses and would have 
killed him had not Zipporah appeased the wrathful Deity by 
circumcising her son, belongs to the folklore of a people still in a 
state of crude barbarism, and is part of a story which enforced the 
necessity of circumcision among the Hebrew worshippers of Yah- 
weh. An over-minute criticism might find a contradiction between 
the statement that Zipporah had but one son to circumcise, and the 
fact that it was the ' sons ' of Moses who accompanied him to Egypt 
(Ex. 4^°). Such verbal criticism, however, is needless; it is 
sufficient for the historian that the story is a mere fragment, 
almost unintelligible as it stands, and in complete disaccord with 
the historical setting in which it is placed." ^ 

III. Reliability of Historical Material 

Historical reliability is a question of very great importance. 
It has to be determined by careful criticism. There are, indeed, 
many gradations of reliability. Some things are impossible, 
some improbable, some uncertain ; others possible, or probable, 
or certain. Every one of these gradations appear in the study 
of human testimony and the sources of history. Under this 
head I shall give a few specimens to illustrate the different 
departments of Biblical Histor}-. 

1 Sayce, 2"he Early History of the Hebreios, p. 165. 



THE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 529 

1. The Story of the Deluge 

The story of the Deluge appears in two poetic narratives 
interwoven in the book of Genesis. How far is it reliable his- 
tory? Let Ryle answer. 

'•It would argue want of candour not to consider frankly at 
this point the historic character of the narrative which describes 
so tremendous a calamity. And, on the threshold of such an 
inquiry, we have to deal with the fact that science speaks in no 
hesitating language upon the subject. There is no indication that 
since man appeared upon the earth any universal and simultane- 
ous inundation of so extraordinary a character as to overwhelm 
the highest mountain peaks has ever occurred. So vast an accu- 
mulation of water all over the terrestrial globe would be in itself 
a physical impossibility. None, at any rate, has taken place in 
the geological period to which our race belongs. The language 
relating the catastrophe is that of an ancient legend describing a 
prehistoric event. It must be judged as such. Allowance must 
be made, both for the exaggeration of poetical description and 
for the influence of oral tradition during generations, if not cen- 
turies, before the beginnings of Hebrew literature." ^ 

2. The Water from the Rock 

There are two stories of the bringing of the water from the 
rock. The prophetic narrative ^ puts it in the wilderness of 
Sin earty in the wanderings. The priestl}^ narrative ^ puts it 
in the wilderness of Zin, forty years after.* The probability 
is that these are two different accounts of the same miracle, 
occasioned by an unconscious mistake of a single letter in 
reading Sin for Zin, or vice versa. The difference as to the 
name of the place does not impair the reliability of the event. 
It rather tends to verify it ; for it shows that the two narratives 
are independent, and that we have two witnesses of the event 
rather than one, the second dependent on the first. There is 
certainly a geographical error, and it involves an error as to the 
time of the event. But these errors do not destroy the relia- 
bility of the event itself. 

1 Ryle, The Earhj Narratives of Genesis, 1892, p. 112. 

2 Ex. 17. 3 Nu. 20. 

* See Briggs, Higher CrifAcism of the Hexateuch, new ed., 1897, p. 79. 
2 m 



530 STUDY OE HOLY SCKIPTURE 

3. The Census of Quirinius 

The story of the census of Quirinius as given in Luke 2^ 
is open to serious doubt. Plummer states the case with care- 
fulness and sobriety. 

"From B.C. 9 to 6 Sentius Saturninus was governor; from e.g. 6 
to 4 Quinctilins Varus. Then all is uncertain until a.d. 6, when 
P. Sulpicius Quirinius becomes governor and holds the census 
mentioned in Acts b^\ and also by Josephus {Ant, xviii. 1. 1, 2. 1). 
It is quite possible, as Zumpt and others have shown, that Qui- 
rinius was governor of Syria during part of the interval between 
B.C. 4 and a.d. 6, and that his first term of office was B.C. 3, 2. 
But it seems to be impossible to find room for him between B.C. 9 
and the death of Herod ; and, unless Ave can do that, Lk. is not 
saved from an error in chronology. Tertullian states that the 
census was held by Sentius Saturninus {Adv. Marc, iv. 19) ; and 
if that is correct we may suppose that it was begun by him 
and continued by his successor. On the other hand, Justin 
Martyr three times states that Jesus Christ was born iirl Kvp-qvLov, 
and in one place states that this can be officially ascertained €k 

Tiov a-rroypacjjwv roiv yevofxevo)v (Apol., i. 34, 46 ; Dial., Ixxviii.). We 
must be content to leave the difficulty unsolved. But it is mon- 
strous to argue that because Lk. has (possibly) made a mistake as 
to Quirinius being governor at this time, therefore the whole 
story about the census and Joseph's journey to Bethlehem is a 
fiction. Even if there was no census at this time, business con- 
nected with enrolment might take Joseph to Bethlehem, and Lk. 
would be correct as to his main facts. That Lk. has confused 
this census with the one in a.d. 6, 7, which he himself mentions. 
Acts 5'^', is not credible. We are warranted in maintaining (1) 
that a Roman census in Judaea at this time, in accordance with 
instructions given by Augustus, is not improbable ; and (2) that 
some official connection of Quirinius with Syria and the holding 
of this census is not impossible. The accuracy of Lk. is such 
that we ought to require very strong evidence before rejecting any 
statement of his as an unquestionable blunder. But it is far better 
to admit the possibility of error than to attempt to evade this by 
either altering the text or giving forced interpretations of it." ^ 

Many other examples might be given, but our purpose is 
merely to illustrate the principles and methods of historical 
criticism, and not to collect results. 

1 Alfred Plummer, Gospel according to Saint Luke, 1896, pp. 49-60. 



THiE PRACTICE OF HISTORICAL CRITICISM 531 

IV. The Ai^i of Historical Criticism 

The work of historical criticism of Holy Scripture has only 
begun its career. It has given us a new biblical history illumi- 
nated with new light and enriched with the colouring of Bible 
times. The work will go on until it fulfils its entire task. 

Ancient Jerusalem lies buried beneath the rubbish of more 
than eighteen centuries. It is covered over by the blood- 
stained dust of myriads of warriors, who have battled heroically 
under its walls and in its towers and streets. Its vallej^s are 
filled with the debris of palaces, churches, and temples. But 
the Holy Place of three great religions is still there, and 
thither countless multitudes turn in holy reverence and pious 
pilgrimage. In recent times this rubbish has in a measure 
been explored ; and by digging to the rock-bed and the ancient 
foundations bearing the marks of the Phoenician workmen, the 
ancient city of the holy times has been recovered, and may now 
be constructed in our minds by the artist and the historian with 
essential accuracy. Just so the Holy Scripture, as given by 
divine inspiration to holy prophets, lies buried beneath the 
rubbish of centuries. It is covered over with the debris of the 
traditional interpretations of the multitudinous schools and 
sects. The intellectual and moral conflicts which have raged 
about it have been vastly more costly than all the battles of 
armed men. For this conflict has never ceased. This battle 
has taxed and strained all the highest energies of our race. 
It has been a struggle in the midst of nations and of families, 
and has torn many a man's inmost soul with agony and groan- 
ings. 

The valleys of biblical truth have been filled up with the 
debris of human dogmas, ecclesiastical institutions, liturgical 
formulas, priestly ceremonies, and casuistic practices. His- 
torical criticism is digging through this mass of rubbish. His- 
torical criticism is searching for the rock-bed of divine truth 
and for the massive foundations of the Divine Word, in order 
to recover the real Bible. Historical criticism is sifting all 
this rubbish. It will gather out every precious stone. Nothing 
will escape its keen eye. Like the builders of Nehemiah's 



532 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

time, every critic has to build with his weapons in hand; for 
the traditionalists jDrefer the modern ruins to the ancient city 
of God, and they battle for every speck of rubbish as if it were 
the choicest gold. But as surely as the temple of Herod and 
the city of the Asmoneans arose from the ruins of the former 
temples and cities, just so surely will the old Bible rise in the 
reconstructions of biblical criticism into a splendour and a 
glory greater than ever before. 

My honoured teacher, Edward Robinson, the father of modern 
biblical geography, on his first exploring expedition discovered 
several huge stones jutting out from the western wall of the 
temple area. Close examination showed that they were the 
first courses of the spring of an arch which bridged the valley 
between the temple and Mount Zion. Men wise in traditional 
opinions disputed the discovery for a time. But after the death 
of Robinson, the English Palestine Exploration Society dug a 
pit near these stones, and deep down beneath the rubbish of 
centuries the remains of the bridge were discovered and the 
critical judgment of Robinson vindicated. It was a great joy 
for me, his pupil and his successor, to descend into the pit and 
see these stones with my own eyes. Robinson's experience 
and mine is the lot of most explorers and their successors, and 
in a general way it illustrates the present situation in the his- 
torical criticism of Biblical Historv and its ultimate results. 



CHAPTER XXII 

BIBLICAL HISTORY 

Biblical History is the history contained in the Holy 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. 

I. The Scope of Biblical History 

Those who exclude the Apocrypha from the Old Testament 
Canon find a long blank in the history between the times of 
Nehemiah and the advent of Jesus the Messiah. Those who 
include the Apocrypha in the Old Testament Canon fill up this 
blank in large measure by the history of the Maccabean times. 
Much of the blank is filled in other respects by the historical 
material contained in other biblical writings. It is not neces- 
sary that Biblical History should limit its sources to the his- 
torical prose literature of the Bible. A large amount of 
historical material may be derived from the prophets and poets 
and sages, and also from the epistles and the apocalypse. 

Biblical History is not coextensive with the histories con- 
tained in the Canon of Holy Scripture ; it is rather a history 
which comprehends all the biblical material in the entire extent 
of Biblical Literature. Biblical History, moreover, is not con- 
fined to the forms and methods of historical composition and 
representation, or to the grooves of historical interpretation of 
the biblical historian. It organizes the entire biblical material 
in accordance with the most exact and thorough scientific 
methods. 

It is necessary to distinguish Biblical History from the his- 
tory of Israel on the one hand, and from the contemporary history 
of the Old and New Testaments on the other; and to put these 
three branches of history, which deal more or less with the same 
themes, in their true relations. 

633 



534 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

II. CONTEMPOKAEY HiSTORY 

The contemporary history of the Old Testament aims to study 
the history of the nations that influenced Israel. It studies the 
monuments of Babylonia, Egypt, Phoenicia, Assyria, and the 
lesser nations that encompassed Israel or were entwined with 
him in his development. It studies the histories of Persia, 
Greece, and Rome, — the ancient masters of the world that 
held Israel in subjection. The contemporary history of the 
New Testament studies the history and civilization of Greece 
and Rome and the influences that came from Oriental life and 
thought, so far as these constituted the environment of the life 
of Jesus and the history of the Apostolic Church. ^ All these 
cast a flood of light upon the history recorded in the Bible, and 
give us invaluable information with regard to the external in- 
fluences working upon Israel and cooperating with the internal 
influences to produce his historical training. Great attention 
has been paid to this method of study in recent times, and it 
has in many minds overwhelmed and absorbed the study of Bib- 
lical History itself. 

Biblical History moves on its way in the narratives of the 
Bible, touching the great nations of the Old World at various 
points in its advancement, giving and receiving influences of 
various kinds, but pervaded with a sense of an overpowering 
force that has determined not only the History of Israel, but 
of all nations of the world. Israel has been a football of the 
nations, trodden under foot and tossed hither and thither by 
those mightier than he, but he has been a ball of light and fire 
that no violence could quench; for a divine blessing was in 
him for all mankind. God cast Israel into the fiery furnace 
that his dross might be consumed and the pure gold shine in its 
glorious lustre. The nations were his hammers, to beat him into 
the holy image God had designed for him from the beginning. 

The Hebrew prophets see that Yahweh, the God of Israel, 
shaped all the migrations of the nations, all the movements of 
mankind, all the revolutions of history, for the training of His 
own well-beloved people. ^ 

1 See pp. 505 seq. 2 Deut. 32*-9 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 535 

And yet Israel was not for himself alone. The biblical his- 
torians do not encourage any neglect of the other nations of the 
world. They represent that all are to share in the blessings of 
Abraham; they see all nations ultimately before the judgment- 
seat of God; they look forward to their ultimate incorporation 
in the kingdom under the Messianic King. The prophet re- 
bukes Israel for supposing that he alone was the people of God, 
and that all the other nations were neglected by the God of all 
the earth. ^ 

God watched over the other nations of the world, guided their 
history, and will bring them also to salvation and judgment. 
No one can altogether understand Biblical History until he has 
placed it in the light of its contemporary history; and yet he 
would make a serious mistake who would suppose that this 
contemporary history is the key to Biblical History. The 
Biblical History is the centre of this circumference of nations. 
It is the Sun in the midst of the world in whose rising all 
mankind are to rejoice. ^ It is the light streaming forth from 
Biblical History that illuminates the contemporary history. 
Contemporary history reflects the rays of that light. The 
study of the one ought not to conflict with the study of the 
other. 

III. The History of Israel 

It is also necessary to distinguish Biblical History from the 
History of Israel. The History of Israel is a part of the his- 
tory of the world. It is a section of the discipline of universal 
history. It should be studied with a purely scientific interest. 
It uses Biblical History as one of its sources; it uses contem- 
porary history as another; it arranges all its material in a 
scientific manner, in accordance with the principles of historic 
development. 

It is more extensive than Biblical History. It fills up the 
numerous blanks that are left therein from other sources of 
information. 

The history of the struggle between Persia and Greece, and 
of the fortunes of Israel in those times, is of little importance 

1 Amos 97. 2 Is. 60. 



536 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

to Biblical History; but it is of great importance to the history 
of Israel. The historian will lay much more stress upon it than 
upon many earlier periods where the biblical writers dwell at 
length. 

The student of the history of Israel is greatly interested in 
the events of external history, such as battles and sieges and 
political relations. The writers of the Bible have little interest 
in these, and omit to mention them, save so far as they have 
religious bearings or can be used for religious instruction. As 
Professor Kent says : 

" Historic proportion is quite disregarded. For example, in the 
book of Samuel the important battle of Gilboa is treated in a 
few verses, while the relations between Samuel (the prophet) and 
Saul occupy several chapters. This and kindred facts are ex- 
plained when the aim of the prophetic writer is fully appreciated. 
For him events in themselves were of little importance, since his 
purpose was not merely to write a history of his people ; instead, 
it was primarily and simply to teach spiritual truth. To attain 
this exalted end, he was as ready to employ a late tradition as an 
early narrative. Often when he found two accounts of the same 
event he introduced both of them, even though this involved 
small contradictions and historic inaccuracies. If he had had the 
data at his command whereby he could determine which of the 
two was the older and therefore the more authentic record, he 
probably would not have deemed it worthy of his attention, for 
it would not have rendered his teaching any more effective with 
his contemporaries." ^ 

The history of Israel is less extensive than Biblical History. 
It does not enter into the province of the divine influence, that 
most characteristic feature of Biblical History. It stumbles at 
theophanies, miracles, and prophecies. It finds it difficult to 
adjust these divine influences to the principles of scientific 
study. The purely personal relations of Yahweh to His people 
are matters into which the scientific historian does not venture. 

The scientific study of the history of Israel is of inestimable 
importance. No one can understand altogether the history of 
Israel, unless Israel's true place and importance in universal 
history have been determined. Each one of the great nations 

1 A History of the Hebrew People, 1896, Vol. I. p. 10. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 537 

of the Old World has contributed its own best achievements 
for the weal of humanity. No one can understand the work- 
ings of God in history who does not estimate, to some extent 
at least, the work of Egypt and Assyria, of Phoenicia and 
Persia, of Greece and Rome, in the advancement of mankind. 
The history of the world is, as Lessing shows, the divine edu- 
cation of our race; and every nation has its share in that 
instruction, and contributes its quota of experience to the suc- 
cessive generations. The nations of the modern world have 
all come into line with their interplay of forces, making the 
problem more complex and wonderful. The old nations of 
the Orient, — China, India, and Japan, — with Africa and the 
islands of the sea, share in that education and service. The 
world is one in origin, in training, and in destiny. There is 
force in Kenan's remark: 

'' Jewish History that would have the monopoly of the miracle 
is not a bit more extraordinary than Greek History, If the 
supernatural intervention is necessary to explain the one, the 
supernatural intervention is also necessary to explain the other." ^ 

I do not agree with his use of the term "supernatural." But 
I do agree with him in the opinion that the hand of God alone 
can explain the history of Greece and the blessings it contained 
for mankind. The school of Clement of Alexandria were cor- 
rect in the opinion that the philosophy of Greece was a divinely 
ordered preparation for the gospel, as were the Law and the 
Prophets of Israel. The biblical historians were the first to 
see this fact, and to set it forth in the horizon of their narra- 
tives. They see that the God of Israel is the God seated upon 
the circle of the heavens, turning the hearts of kings and 
nations ; they know that the Messiah of Israel is the universal 
King ; they see all the forces of history converging toward His 
universal sway. It is a Hebrew poet who describes the New 
Jerusalem as the city of the regeneration of the nations : 

Glorious things are being spoken in thee, city of God ! 
I mention Rahab and Babel as belonging to those who know me ; 
Lo, Philistia and Tyre with Gush : " This one was born there," 
And as belonging to Zion, it is said, — " This one and that one were born in 
her," 

1 Histoire du Peuple cVIsrael, I. p. v. 



538 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

And "Ely on, Yaliweh — he establisheth her, 

He counteth in writing up the peoples, — ' This one was horn there.' " 

Yea, they are singing as well as dancing, all those who dwell in thee.i 

The origin of Christianity and its development in the Apos- 
tolic age may also be treated in the same way as a section of 
Universal History, where the Biblical sources will take their 
place alongside of other historical sources and no attention 
will be paid to Canonical limitations or Biblical proportions. 
Such a method is quite legitimate so far as it is faithful to its 
own ideals and does not usurp the functions or depreciate the 
importance of a more strictly Biblical History from the point 
of view of the History contained in Holy Scripture itself. 

I do not by any means undervalue the scientific study of the 
history of Israel and the origins of Christianity; I do not 
depreciate the importance of the contemporary history of the 
Old and the New Testaments, when I insist that a more strictly 
Biblical History from a Biblical point of view has its own place 
and importance as the lamp of the nations and the key for the 
development of mankind. 

IV. The Types of Biblical History 

Biblical History has an extensive variety of sources. There 
is first a group of histories that are of unique importance. 
We have already considered these as to their form as specimens 
of historical prose literature. ^ We have now to consider them 
as to their substance and the use of the historical material they 
give us. These historical writings cover a long range in time 
and an immense mass of detail; they were written by many 
writers in three different languages ; and yet they have common 
features, which distinguish them from all other histories and 
entitle them to be bound together in one book as Biblical 
History. The history extends over a vast period of time; it 
begins with the creation of the world, it closes with the erection 
of the banner of the Messiah in Rome, the capital of the world. 
It is narrower in its geographical range. Its centre is Pales- 
tine, a little land that has always been and always must be, for 
geographical reasons, the centre of the world. But it radiates 

1 Ps. 87. See Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, p. 227. ^ gee pp. 329 seq. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 539 

from this centre into all the territories of the great nations of 
the Old World. It deals with a little nation and very often 
with single persons; but that nation was the people of God, 
the bearer of the greatest religions of the world, Judaism and 
Christianity, which have determined the entire development 
of mankind; and these individuals were the prophets of God: 
Abraham, Moses, Samuel, David, Solomon, Elijah, Isaiah, 
Jeremiah, Ezra, — names that outshine the brightest stars of 
other nations in moral worth, and all of whom point, as 
watchers of the night, to the dawn of the sun of the world, 
Jesus Christ, the greatest of men, the Son of God, and Saviour 
of man. Such a history that discloses to us the religious heroes 
of mankind, the banner-bearers of God, and that culminates in 
the glories of God manifest in the flesh, has a unique place and 
importance in the development of the world. 

Biblical History is wonderful in its variety. Four different 
types of writers give us four different points of view of the 
most important and fundamental characters and events. There 
are four Gospels, that combine to give us a comprehensive view 
of Jesus Christ, our Saviour. Any one of them is easily worth 
all other books written by men. We have also four narratives 
of the establishment of the Old Covenant. 

Higher Criticism has traced these four narratives in the 
Hexateuch, and has for the most part separated them so that 
we can place them in parallelism, just as w^e do the Gospels in 
our Harmonies. A post-exilic editor compacted them together, 
just as Tatian did the Gospels in the second Christian century.^ 
Four Gospels are historically better than one; four narratives 
of the story of the founding of the Old Covenant are also better 
than one for all those who desire to investigate the historicity 
of the material contained in them. We have to give up the 
traditional theory of Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, but 
we gain four writers in the place of Moses ; and the history of 
Moses, and the establishment of his covenant, gains in strength 
by the testimony of four witnesses instead of one. 

In the history of the kingdom from its establishment to the 
exile, we have two parallel narratives, in the books of Samuel 

1 See pp. 278 seq. 



540 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and Kings on the one hand, and the Chronicler on the other; 
bnt Higher Criticism finds in the narratives of Samuel and 
Kings three original writers, similar to three of the writers 
of the Hexateuch. 

In the period subsequent to the exile, the Chronicler tells 
the story of the times of Ezra and Nehemiah; and the first book 
of Maccabees the glorious revolution of the Maccabean age. 

Biblical History is, however, much more extensive than the 
historical writings contained in the Bible. The chief writers 
of Biblical History were prophets, poets, and priests, and these 
have given us historical material in other literary forms. 
Hosea and Amos share the features of the Ephraimitic his- 
torian. Isaiah, Micah, Zephaniah, Nahum, Habakkuk, share 
the features of the Judaic narrator. Jeremiah, the second 
Isaiah, and Haggai are kindred to the Deuteronomic writers, 
Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel, and Malachi to the priestly writers. 
These prophets all are involved in the history of their times, and 
either shape that history or interpret it from the point of view 
of the divine mind as made known to them. If there is any 
such thing as a philosophy of Hebrew history, a divine plan 
and purpose in it all, we can learn more of the secret springs 
of that history from the prophetical writings than from the his- 
torical writings. 

So in the New Testament the epistles give us the underlying 
principles and formative ideas of apostolic history. No one can 
understand the foundations of the apostolic Church who depends 
on the book of Acts alone. And the great collection of prophe- 
cies contained in the Apocalypse of John gives us historical 
information as to the martyr period of the apostolic Church 
which extends beyond the history of the book of Acts, without 
which we would be left in darkness. 

The Hebrew poets and wise men are not so important for 
historical purposes, and yet there are historical poems of great 
value in the Psalter; and, besides, the lyrics and the sentences 
of wisdom, not to speak of the larger products of the imagina- 
tion in prose and poetry, give us clues to the inner spirit, reli- 
gious experience, and ethical ideals of the history, especially 
in periods when all other information is lacking. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 541 

These four kinds of writers of Biblical History that we find 
in the Old Testament, as well as in the New, are not without sig- 
nificance, for they correspond with four types that run through 
the entire literature of the Bible. St. James, St. Peter, St. Paul, 
and St. John represent four different points of view in the New 
Testament epistles. Each of these types has its corresponding 
gospel. In the Old Testament we distinguish the writers of 
the Wisdom Literature from the writers of the lyric poetry, 
and both of these from the prophetic and the priestly writers. 
These are the same types that we find in the New Testament, 
and we ought to expect to find them represented in the older 
histories. These are not fanciful combinations of theorists and 
speculators, but they are the interesting product of the scien- 
tific study of the Bible itself. When we compare these four 
types of biblical writers with the results of the scientific study 
of other religions and races, we find that they correspond with 
the four great temperaments of mankind, and the four great 
types of character that reappear throughout human history.^ 

It is one of the wonderful results of the Higher Criticism of 
the Bible that all the important events and doctrines rest upon 
a fourfold foundation, and a comprehension of the four great 
ways of looking at things that are possible to the human mind. 
There is danger in our study of the Bible on this very account. 
Few minds are sufficiently comprehensive to grasp the entire 
representation of these biblical writers. Each man will natu- 
rally look at any subject through the eyes and the representa- 
tions of the author of kindred temperament and type. The 
analysis of the Hexateuch has brought to light a large number 
of apparent inconsistencies. This was what ought to have 
been expected. They are no more, however, than those that 
trouble scholars in the Harmony of the Gospels after all these 
centuries of study. On the other hand, many old difficulties 
have been removed. Many statements that were inconsistent 
and even contradictory in the same author are complementary 
and supplementary in different authors; and so we gain a 
higher unity of representation, which is all the grander for the 
fourfold variety out of which it springs. The history has not 
^ See pp. 669 seq., for a further study of the types. 



542 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the unity of a straight line, a series of points, but the unity of 
a cube — such unity as we see in the cubical structure of the 
Holy of Holies of the tabernacle, and the temple. The new 
Jerusalem of the Apocalypse is four-square. The army of the 
living God marches in four solid divisions. The cherubic 
chariot of its King faces the four quarters of the earth. The 
four cherubic faces represent not only the four Gospels, but 
also the four types that are in the epistles of the New Testa- 
ment, and the histories and writings of the Old Testament. 

1. The TheopJianic Presence 

Biblical History has certain features that distinguish it 
from all other history. The most important of these is the 
theophanic presence of God. 

There are some who would point to miracles and prophecy 
as the great supernatural features of the Bible, which prove its 
uniqueness and its divine origin. But it is just these super- 
natural features of miracles and prophecies that, in our day, 
constitute, for scientific and literary scholars, the chief obsta- 
cles to their faith in the Bible. Biblical History is not unique 
in this regard. The ancient histories of other nations claim 
miracles and divine prophecy for the leaders of their religion. 
The scientific historian is tempted to treat the miracles and 
prophecies of Biblical History in the same way in which he 
treats them in the history of Egypt, Assyria, Greece, and the 
Christian Church. He is bound so to do, unless something of 
a distinguishing character is found in these features of the 
Bible. It is also noteworthy that Moses and Jesus recognize 
miracle-working and prophecy beyond the range of prophetic 
working, outside the kingdom of God.^ There must be some- 
thing in the divine character of Biblical History that will vin- 
dicate its reality and power, or it cannot be saved from the 
tomb into which modern historical criticism has cast the super- 
natural in all other history. 

It has long been evident to Christian historians of critical 
sagacit}^ that the Bible does not magnify the supernatural in 

1 Deut. 13 : Mt. 2423-24. 



BIBLICAL HISTOKY 543 

miracle-working and prophecy to the same extent as is common 
in treatises on the evidences of Christianity and in systems of 
Apologetics. 

Undue stress upon these things has called attention away 
from still more important features in Biblical History. The 
miracles of Biblical History were not wrought in order to give 
modern divines evidences of the truth and reality of the biblical 
religion. The prophets did not aim to give apologists proofs 
for the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures. The miracles were 
wrought as acts of divine judgment and redemption. Prophecy 
was given to instruct men in the religion of God, in order to 
their salvation and moral growth. The miracles were not 
designed to show that God was able to violate the laws of 
nature, to overrule or suspend them at His will. The miracles 
of the Bible rather show that God Himself was present in 
nature, directing His own laws in deeds of redemption and of 
judgment. The miracles are divine acts in nature. Prophecy 
was not designed to show that God can overrule the laws of the 
human mind, suspend them, or act instead of them, using man 
as a mere speaking-tube to convey heavenly messages to this 
world. Prophecy rather discloses the presence of God in man, 
stimulating him to use all the powers of his intellectual and 
moral nature in the instruction of the people of God.^ Mira- 
cles and prophecy in Biblical History are the signs of the 
presence of God in that history. He has not left that history 
to itself. He has not left the laws of nature and of mind to 
their ordinary development, but He has taken His place at the 
head of affairs as the monarch of nature and the king of men to 
give His personal presence and superintendence to a history 
which is central, and dominant of the history of the world. ^ 

This is the conception that we find in Biblical History. 
Miracles were chiefly at the exodus from Egypt and the entrance 
into Palestine. Here they are associated with the theophanic 
presence of God. They reappear in the age of Elijah and 
Elisha, a period marked by theophanies. Then again they 
were wrought by Jesus, the Messiah, and by His apostles, 
in connection with theophanies of the Divine Spirit. The 

1 Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, pp. 21 seq. 2 i (^or. IS^^-ss, 



5M STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Theophany, the Christophany, and tlie Pneumatophany are the 
sources of the miracles of the Bible. When God is really 
present in nature, in the forms of time and space and circum- 
stance, then miracles are the most natural things in the world. 

The prophecy of the Old Testament also springs from the- 
ophanies. The great master-spirits of prophecy were called by 
theophanies. The apostles were commissioned by Christoph- 
anies and Pneumatophanies. God entered into the human 
mind, into its perception, conception, and imagination, and 
guided these to give utterance to the wonderful things of God.^ 
I do not presume to say that every miracle and every prophetic 
discourse may be traced directly to theophanic influence, yet I 
do venture to say that the most of them can be traced to such 
origination, and that the others may likewise be referred to a 
more secret divine presence in nature and in man, even if that 
presence was not always disclosed in some external manner. 

It is necessary, however, to go much farther, in order to 
realize the importance of the theophany in Biblical History. 
It is the representation of the Patriarchal History that God 
was constantly manifesting Himself to the antediluvians and 
patriarchs in various theophanic forms, to guide them in all the 
important affairs of their lives. The primitive narratives of the 
exodus tell us that God assumed the form of an angel and then 
of a pillar of cloud and fire, and remained with His people in 
a permanent form of theophany from the exodus from Egypt 
until the entrance in the Holy Land. God's theophanic pres- 
ence remained with His people until the exile. The ark was 
His throne, the tabernacle His abode, the temple His palace. 
The sacred writers of the Old Testament knew that God was 
reigning in Jerusalem as the real King of Israel and the 
nations, by personal theophanic presence. 

The theophanic presence was withdrawn from the nation 
during the exile and only granted to a few prophets ; but on 
the return to the Holy Land, God again appeared in wondrous 
theophanies. These are not recorded in the cold, dry narrative 
of the Chronicler, but they appear in the psalms and proph- 
ecies of the period. All the theophanies of the Old Testa- 
1 Bnggs, Messianic Prophecy^ 7tli ed., pp. 20 seq. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 545 

ment were in order to prepare mankind for the grandest of all 
theophanies — the Incarnation of the Son of God. Indeed, 
Saint Paul saw the preexistent Messiah in the angel of the 
presence, who guided Israel through the wilderness of the 
wanderings.^ From this point of vieAV the theophanic Christ 
prepares the way for the Incarnate Christ. The Incarnation 
was God manifest in the flesh, an abiding presence of God, no 
longer in the Holy of Holies, but in familiar intercourse with 
men until His death on the cross and ascension to the heavenly 
throne. Then a few days of divine absence, and the theophany 
of the Divine Spirit came at Pentecost. 

Pneumatophany and Christophany abound in the period of 
planting the Church in the world. The last known to the 
biblical writings is the wonderful one to Saint John in Patmos. 
And here Biblical History comes to an end, with a prophetic 
picture of the final scenes of all history. 

From this survey, it is clear that the most distinguishing 
feature of Biblical History is the theophanic presence of God. 
The narratives of the biblical writers treat of the times of that 
presence. When the theophany is absent, the biblical narra- 
tive is absent also. When the theophany is absent, the biblical 
historian sees nothing to narrate ; his Lord is not there. His- 
tory is to him a blank. When the theophany is withdrawn and 
the enthroned Saviour governs His kingdom without theophanic 
manifestations. Biblical History passes over into Church His- 
tory. From this point of view. Biblical History is the history 
of the theophanic presence of God in His kingdom of grace. 

This central feature of Biblical History determines all others. 

The Ephraimitic historian begins his narrative with the story 
of theophanic manifestations to the patriarchs, taking a special 
interest in Israel, the father of the nation. This writer is 
graphic, plastic, and realistic. God appears in dreams. He 
comes in forms of man and angel. He lets Himself be seen 
and touched. He even condescends to wrestle with Jacob. 
He appears to Moses in the burning bush as the angel of the 
presence. He assumes human form and lets Moses see Him 
and commune with Him in his tent. He manifests Himself to 

1 1 Cor. lO'^-i. See Briggs, Messiah of Apostles, p. 99. 
2x 



546 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the elders of Israel, enthroned on a glorious throne, and lets 
them eat the covenant sacrifice in His presence. God is to this 
narrator ever present to guide the nation as their King. 

The same spirit guides the Ephraimitic narrator who tells 
the story of the later history. He is very zealous for his own 
God, and scorns the gods of the nations. Elijah condenses this 
feeling in his bitter irony to the prophets of Baal: 

" Cry aloud : for he is a god ; either he is musing, or he is gone 
aside, or he is on a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth and must 
be awaked." ^ 

The calm, serene confidence of the prophet is justified by the 
theophanic interposition and the cry of the people : 

" Yahweh, He is God I Yahweh, He is God ! " ^ 

Saint Mark writes in a similar spirit in the 'New Testament. 
Saint Mark has no interest in introductory matters or even 
results. He is absorbed in the Christ of history, in His life 
and deeds. His plastic style gives us Jesus as He mani- 
fested Himself. He tells his story in such a realistic and 
powerful manner that we bow before the Christ as the King 
of nature and of men, without waiting for solicitation or 
argument. 

Other histories give us evidences of the presence and power 
of God. Mythological conceptions lie at the basis of the his- 
tories of other ancient nations. There the gods descend to 
earth and clothe themselves in forms of nature and man ; but 
they thereby assume the parts and passions of man and share 
in all his weaknesses, sins, and corruptions; or they become 
merely forces and forms of physical nature. But the the- 
ophanies of these biblical historians never confound God with 
man, with angels, or with nature — 'the form assumed by God 
is merely for manifestation to holy men ; and it is a thin veil 
through which as much of the glory of deity shines as the holy 
men were able to bear. And whereas mythological conceptions 
are only at the mythical roots of other ancient histories, the 
theophanies pervade and control Biblical History from the 
beginning to the end. There is no other history in which 

1 1 K. 1827. 2 1 K. 1839. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 547 

God is manifest in such a simple, natural, and yet kingly way, 
where men see Him, know Him, and obey Him as their own 
Prince and King. 

2. The Kingdom of Redemption 

The Judaic historian begins his story with an epic poem, 
disclosing, on the one side, the origin and development of 
human sin and the divine wrath, and on the other the grace of 
God in the progress of redemption. The great theme of his 
history is redemption from sin. He and other biblical his- 
torians of the same type give us the development of the 
Kingdom of Redemption. The great Hebrew epic that con- 
stitutes the preface of this history is the most wonderful of 
stories.^ The history of mankind begins with Adam, sculpt- 
ured by the hands of God and quickened by the breath of God. 
The man is placed in a paradise planted by the hands of God, 
and has charge of animals formed, like himself, by the hands 
of God. He receives his wife from the hands of God, built 
out of a portion of his own body. He is trained in conception 
and speech by the voice of God. All things in him and about 
him exhibit the marks of God's personal presence and contact; 
and yet Adam sinned against his creator and benefactor, and 
brought an entail of woe upon our race. The epic describes, 
in a series of pictures, the successive catastrophes of mankind, 
the Fall, the Fratricide, the Deluge, and the Dispersion, events 
that lie at the foundations of human history. Faint reflections 
of these events are found in the legends and myths of other 
ancient nations, but nowhere do we see such a beautiful, sim- 
ple, touching, and profound story. It is an artist's master- 
piece. It is poetry in form as well as substance — an epic 
poem of the highest order. Here the imagination and fancy 
are supreme, and yet there is nothing of those grotesque mytho- 
logical forms, and those extravagant legendary scenes, that 
constitute the staple of all efforts to depict the origin of things 
among other ancient nations. The poem is so simple, so chaste, 
so realistic, so artless, that it has been mistaken by most stu- 
1 See Briggs, The Bible, the Church, and the Beason, pp. 281 seq. 



548 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

dents for prose. Such poetry must have been inspired by a 
divine art; such imagination and fancy must have been in- 
flamed and at the same time tempered and subdued by a divine 
breath. 

The poem describes the origin and development of sin in the 
family of Adam, in the descendants of Cain, in the human race, 
in the family of Noah, in the builders of Babel. The wrath of 
God comes upon sin in several catastrophes of judgment. But 
redemption is never absent. The promise to the woman's seed 
opens up the path of Messianic prophecy, which the prophet 
traces in its stages of divine revelation, so that human sin is 
overwhelmed and destroyed in the progress of redemption. Sin 
and Redemption are the master words of his entire history. 
We see them unfolding in the patriarchal story, in the exodus, 
and the wanderings, and the conquest. Yahweh, the personal 
God and Saviour, is ever with His people to guide and to bless. 
This prophet is the brightest and best narrator in the Bible. 
His stories never tire us, for they ever touch the secret springs 
of our heart's emotions. 

A writer of a similar spirit tells the story of David, of his 
sins and sorrows and restoration, and traces the history of the 
kingdom of redemption in his seed. 

Matthew is an evangelist of a similar spirit — the favourite 
among the Gospels. He is the evangelist of the Messianic 
promise, of the kingdom of redemption, and of the conflict of 
sin and grace. 

The history of sin and of redemption in these biblical his- 
torians is unique. Sin, indeed, is everywhere in the world. 
Other histories cover it over. These histories expose it. And 
5^et Israel was not the greatest sinner among the nations. If 
his sins are more patent, are more in the light of histor}^ 
it is because he has ever been a penitent sinner. Deceitful 
Abraham, crafty Jacob, choleric Moses, wilful Saul, passionate 
David, voluptuous Solomon, hasty Peter, doubting Thomas, 
heresy-hunting Paul, — these are not the chief of sinners. 
Their counterparts are to be found in all ages and all over the 
world. We see them every da}^ in our streets. They are not 
distinguished above other men as sinners ; but they are distin- 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 549 

guished as repenting sinners, the discoverers of the divine for- 
giveness of sin, the banner-bearers of redemption, the trophies 
of divine grace. No other history but Biblical History gives 
us such a history of redemption, an unfolding of the grace of 
God, from the first promise of the ancient epic, through all the 
intricate variety of Messianic prophecy and fulfilment, until 
we see the Redeemer ascend to heaven, the son of woman, the 
second Adam, the serpent-bruiser, victor over sin and death, 
to reign on a throne of grace as the world's Redeemer. 

3. Divine Fatherly Discipline 

The fifth book of the Hexateuch is called Deuteronomy, on 
the ancient Hellenistic theory that it was a repetition of the 
law. Its legislation is represented in the narratives of the 
book of Kings, rather, as the Instruction or the Covenant. 
This legislation is embedded in narratives that assume the 
oratorical form. They have a character of their own ; they are 
of a distinct type from the narratives thus far considered. The 
same writer is largely responsible for the history of the Con- 
quest of Canaan. A writer of the same type has touched up 
the history in the books of Samuel and Kings. This writer 
has the conception of the Fatherhood of God, and from this 
point of view he estimates the history of God's people. The 
whole history is a discipline, a training of the child Israel by 
his father God. The love of the Father and His tender com- 
passion are grandly conceived, and the sin of the nation is a 
violation of the parental relation. The ideal life of God's 
people is a life of love to the Heavenly Father. Man shall not 
live by bread alone, but by the word that issues from the mouth 
of God. The divine instruction, the holy guidance, is what 
the child needs for life, growth, and prosperity. All blessed- 
ness is summed up in loving God and serving Him with the 
whole heart. All curses will come upon those who forsake 
Him and refuse His instruction and guidance. God is Judge 
as well as Father, and this discipline is to end in an ultimate 
judgment that will award the blessings and curses that have 
been earned. The Deuteronomist judges the whole history of 



550 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Israel from this point of view, and regards it as determined by 
the disciplining love of God. 

The Gospel of John is of the same type, in the New Testa- 
ment. It is the gospel of light and life and love. The love 
of God, displayed throughout Biblical Histor}^ reaches its 
climax in that love which gave the only begotten Son for the 
salvation of the world. The life that was in the words of the 
Old Covenant was intensified in the words of Jesus, which are 
spirit and life; it entered the world and dwelt among us as 
the Incarnate Word, the light of the world, and the true life 
for mankind. The Biblical History is thus a history of the 
fatherly love of God. We shall not deny that other histories 
display the love of God, and that all mankind share in the 
heavenly discipline. But it was left for the biblical histories 
to discern that love, and to describe it as the quickening breath 
of history. 

4. The Sovereigyity of the Holy God 

The priestly historian takes the most comprehensive view of 
Biblical History. He begins with an ancient poem describ- 
ing the creation of the world. This stately lyric, in six pen- 
tameter strophes, paints the wondrous drama of the six days' 
work in which the Sovereign of the universe, by word of com- 
mand, summons His host into being, and out of primitive 
chaos organizes a beautiful and orderly whole. The sover- 
eignty of God and the supremacy of law and order are the most 
striking features of this story of creation. ^ I doubt if there is 
any other passage of the Bible that has attracted such universal 
attention and been the centre of such world-wide contest from 
the earliest times. Here Biblical History comes into contact 
with physical science in all its sections, with philosophy, with 
the history of ancient nations, as well as with theology. I 
shall not attempt to discuss the numberless questions that 
spring into our minds in connection with the first chapter of 
Genesis. I shall only remark that if one takes it as a lyric 
poem, and interprets it in the same way as we are accustomed 

1 Briggs, The Bible, the Churchy and the Eeason, pp. 283 seq. See pp. 380 
seq. for the pentameter. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 551 

to interpret the psalms of creation ^ and the poetic descriptions 
of the creation in Hebrew Prophecy ^ and Hebrew Wisdom,^ the 
most of the difficulties will pass away ; and the greater part 
of the contest with science, philosophy, and archaeology will 
cease. 

It is plain that the poem does not teach creation out of noth- 
ing. Its scope is to describe the bringing of beauty and order 
and organism out of primitive chaos. It is clear that the poem 
makes the Word and Spirit of God the agents of creation, and 
these are just as suitable to the conception of development in 
six stages as to the conception of an indefinite number of dis- 
tinct originations out of nothing. 

The order of creation should not trouble us ; for the poet is 
giving us six scenes in the Act of Creation, six pictures of the 
general order of the development of nature. It is not necessary 
to suppose that there was a wide gap between these pictures, and 
that there was no overlapping. When God said, " Let light 
come into being,"* He did not continue saying these words 
for twenty-four hours, or a century or more. Divine speech is 
instantaneous. The effect of His saying may go on forever, 
but His word is a flash of light. God did no more speaking 
on the second day than on the first, no more on the sixth than 
on the third. The poet certainly does not tell us that God 
spake a creative word for every object of creation, or even for 
every species or genus. He, who in His divine conception is 
above the limits of time and space and circumstance, who grasps 
in one conception the whole frame of universal nature, with 
one word, or one breath, or a thought, might have called the 
universe into being. The poem of the Creation conceives God 
as speaking six creative words, in order thus to paint the six 
pictures of creation in an orderly manner. The poet does not 
propose to comprehend in his representation all the forces and 
forms and methods of the work of God. 

Take it as it is, it is a lyric poem of wonderful power and 

beauty. Science has not yet reached a point when it can tell 

the story of creation so well. The story of creation is set forth 

in the legends and myths of many nations. The Babylonian 

1 Pss. 33, 104. 2 Is. m^seg.^ 4424. 3 Prov. 8, Job 38. * Qen. l^. 



552 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

poem gives us the best ethnic representation. But all these 
ethnic conceptions are discoloured by mythological fancies and 
grotesque speculations. Compared with the best of them, the 
Biblical Poem is pure and simple and grand. A divine touch 
is in its sketchings. A Divine Spirit hovered over the mind 
of the poet to bring order and beauty out of his crude and toss- 
ing speculations, no less than He did over the primitive chaos 
of the world itself. 

The priestly historian gives another ancient poem of the 
Deluge, which also is marked by the same general characteris- 
tics of the sovereignty of God and the supremacy of law, that 
we have seen in the poem of the Creation. He connects these 
and his other histories by a well-arranged table of genealogies, 
giving us the line of mankind from Adam through the cen- 
turies of the holy race. He conceives of God as a holy God, 
and of man as created in the image of the holy God, with 
sovereignty over the earth. It is sin against the divine majesty 
that involves the catastrophe of the deluge. This historian 
traces the history of Israel in a series of divine covenants with 
Noah, Abraham, Jacob, and Moses. These involve the govern- 
ment of God and the service of a holy people. The constitu- 
tion of a holy law and holy institutions is his highest delight. 
God's people must be a holy people, as God their Lord is holy, 
and all their approaches to Him must be in well-ordered forms 
of sanctity. The entire history of the exodus and the conquest 
is conceived from this point of view. 

The Chronicler is an author of kindred spirit. He describes 
the history of the kingdom until the exile, and judges of it 
from the point of view of the holy law of God. He also gives 
us an account of the restoration and establishment of the holy 
people in the Holy Land, under the priestly rule and the holy 
law. And here he brings his history to an end. 

A writer of similar spirit in the New Testament is Luke. 
He also begins his genealogy with Adam. He also gives a 
later unfolding of the history in the story of the planting of 
Christianity among Jews and Gentiles. He also has a pro- 
found sense of the sovereignty of God, the work of the Divine 
Spirit, and the ideal of holiness. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 553 

When now we compare these biblical historians with other 
ancient historians, we observe that the Egyptians come nearest 
to the Hebrews in their conception of sanctity, but the Hebrews 
transcend them in making holiness the norm of history. The 
ideal of the image of the Holy God in man is the ideal that 
these biblical writers held in mind as the goal of history. 
Whence could they have derived this ideal if not from the 
mind of God? 

V. The Order of Biblical History 

The material of Biblical History may be divided in accord- 
ance with its great underlying principles into two parts : the 
history of the Old Covenant, guided by theophanies, which 
established the Old Covenant and determined the order and 
sequence of its historical development; and the history of the 
New Covenant, guided by the incarnate Christ and His Chris- 
tophanies, which established the New Covenant and determined 
its history. The unfolding of the Covenant under the guid- 
ance of theophanies and Christophanies makes the subordinate 
periods. 

The history of the Old Covenant is divided into three great 
periods. These may be distinguished by the three great names 
which more than any others determine them, — Moses, David, 
and Ezra. Moses' great covenant, and the theophanies received 
by him, determine the fundamental period of Biblical History. 
All the patriarchal and antediluvian stories prepare for it. 
David's covenant, and the theophanies witnessed by him, deter- 
mine the whole central period of the Hebrew monarchy. The 
stories of Samuel and Saul prepare for this. Ezra's covenant, 
and the more spiritual but no less potent influence of " the good 
hand of his God upon him,"^ determine the whole final period 
of the priests and scribes until the advent of Christ. The his- 
tory of the New Covenant is greater in intension, but much less 
in extension, whether of time or place or circumstance. It may 
be divided into the time of the Forerunners, during the infancy 
and early life of our Lord; the time of the manifestation of the 
1 Ezr. 79 818 . jfeh. 28- is. 



554 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Messiah, His brief earthly public career; and finally the times 
of the apostles as commissioned by the reigning Lord and 
empowered by the indwelling Spirit to organize and establish 
the Christian Church in the world. 

VI. Sections of Biblical History 

Biblical History, even more truly than other history, has a 
wide field of material, which may be subdivided and variously 
arranged. There is first the external frame of the history, its 
environment in time, place, and circumstance. Its environ- 
ment in time gives the discipline of Biblical CJiroyiology ; its 
environment in place, the discipline of Biblical G-eography ; its 
environment in other circumstances of various kinds relating 
to human nature and affairs may be classified under the elastic 
term of Biblical Arcliceology. There are many recent writers 
who include Biblical Chronology and Biblical Geography under 
the more general head of Biblical Archaeology, but without 
propriety. 

It is doubtful, indeed, whether Biblical Archseology is used 
with propriety for many of the other things that are usually 
classified under it. The Natural History of the Bible, dealing 
with animals and plants, the rocks and the soil, has no logical 
or vital connection with archseology. Archseology, as the sci- 
ence of antiquities, belongs to another group of subjects than 
Biblical Geography, Chronology, and Natural History. These 
latter belong to the external environment of the history. 
Archaeology belongs more closely to the history itself, to the 
inner environment, to the monumental records of the history, 
and to the source of the history. Christian Archaeology is 
termed by Piper Monumental Theology.^ Biblical Archaeology, 
from this point of view, would be the Monumental Theology 
of the Bible. Its subdivisions would then be the various 
monuments of Biblical History. Biblical Archaeology would 
then embrace Numismatics, the study of coins mentioned in 
the Bible ; ^ Epigraphies, the study of biblical inscriptions ; and 

1 EinUitung in d. 3Ionumentale Theologie, Gotha, 1867. 

2 F. W. Madden, History of Jewish Coinage, London, 1864. 



BIBLICAL HISTOKY 555 

Biblical Architecture and Sculpture, the study of the buildings 
and various examples of plastic art mentioned in Holy Script- 
ure.^ But there are other matters which cannot be classed 
with the study of the monuments ; namely, the domestic, social, 
religious, and political life of the Jewish people. These sub- 
jects may in great part be considered in connection with the 
Biblical History itself or with Biblical Theology. Thus the 
religious life and all the religious antiquities may be con- 
sidered under the head of Biblical Religion. The domestic, 
social, and political life may come under the head of Biblical 
Ethics. The political and religious organizations can hardly 
escape the attention of the biblical historian. But there will 
still remain a residuum of these topics that can be discussed 
but inadequately, and as it were aside, in Biblical History and 
Biblical Theology, and therefore a place must be found for them 
in Biblical Archaeology, which then under this head will sub- 
divide itself into domestic antiquities, social antiquities, reli- 
gious antiquities, and political antiquities. 

yil. The Sources op Biblical History 

The primitive sources of Biblical History are mythologies, 
legends, poems, laws, whether inscribed, written, or traditional, 
historical documents, and the use of the historical imagination. 

1. Mythical Sources 

There can be little doubt that there is a strong mythological 
element at the basis of Biblical History as well as of other 
ancient histories. The myth is indeed the most primitive 
historic form and mould in which that which is most ancient 
is transmitted from primitive peoples. There are such myths 
in the stories of the book of Genesis, and in the poetry of Job, 
Isaiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and not a few of the Psalms. But 
it is characteristic of all these myths that they have been trans- 
formed by the genius of Hebrew poets under the influence of 
the Divine Spirit, so that all that is polytheistic has disap- 

1 Conrad Schick, Die Stiftshutte^ der Tempel in Jerusalem und der Tempel- 
platz der Jetztzeit, Berlin, 1896. 



556 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

peared, and nothing remains which is unworthy of the ideals 
of the Hebrew religion. It will be sufficient if I quote here 
from recent authorities who have given their attention to this 
subject, and I have selected for this two recent scholars. ^ 

" To the student of comparative religion it is no doubt of great 
interest to notice that in the story of the origins we have a nar- 
rative which shows clear traces of connection with Chaldsean 
traditions ; to the believer in divine inspiration it is of chief im- 
portance to notice how primitive myth is consecrated to spiritual 
uses, and how in the process it is purged of all that is puerile or 
immoral, the main outlines of the original Babylonian story being 
retained, while the lower elements in it are entirely overmastered 
by the sublime spiritual thoughts of a lofty religion. Such ele- 
ments are indeed only survivals, like the survivals in natural 
history, serving, for aught we know, some beneficent purpose, 
showing that Israel's religion had its roots in a Semitic paganism, 
from which under the impulse of the Spirit of God it gradually 
emancipated itself. 'No student of the Old Testament will find 
serious difficulty in the existence of mythical or even polytheistic 
elements which have in fact become the medium of pure religious 
ideas, and which have been so far stripped of their original char- 
acter as to serve the purposes of a monotheistic system." ^ 

Cheyne, in writing of mythological elements in the book of 
Job, says: 

" One of the peculiarities of our poet (which I have elsewhere 
compared with a similar characteristic in Dante) is his willingness 
to appropriate mythic forms of expression from heathendom. 
This willingness was certainly not due to a feeble grasp of his own 
religion ; it was rather due partly to the poet's craving for imagi- 
native ornament, partly to his sympathy with his less developed 
readers, and a sense that some of these forms were admirably 
adapted to give reality to the conception of the ^living God.' 
Several of these points of contact with heathendom have been 
, indicated in my analysis of the poem. I need not again refer to 
these, but the semi-mythological allusions to supernatural beings 
who had once been in conflict with Jehovah (21^^, 25^), and the 
cognate references to the dangerous cloud-dragon ought not to be 
overlooked. Both in Egypt and in Assyria and Babylonia, we 
find these very myths in a fully developed form. The ' leviathan ' 

1 See also Gunkel, Schopfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit, 1895. 

2 Robert Lawrence Ottley, Aspects of the Old Testament., 1897, pp. 57, 58. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 557 

of 3^, the dragon probably of 7^^ (tannin) and certainly of 2&^ 
(nakhasli), and the 'rahab^ of 9^^, 26^^, remind us of the evil 
serpent Apap, whose struggle with the sun-god Ea is described in 
chap. 39 of the Book of the Dead and elsewhere. ^ A battle took 
place,' says M. Maspero, 'between the gods of light and fertility 
and the " sons of rebellion," the enemies of light and life. The 
former were victorious, but the monsters were not destroyed. 
They constantly menace the order of nature, and, in order to resist 
their destructive action, God must, so to speak, create the world 
anew every day.' An equally close parallel is furnished by the 
fourth tablet of the Babylonian creation-story, which describes the 
struggle between the god Marduk (Merodach) and the dragon 
Tiamat or Tiamtu (a fern, corresponding to the Heb. masc. form 
flioyn ' the deep ').... Nor must I forget the ' fool-hardy ' giant 
(K'sil = Orion) in 9^, 38^^, nor the dim allusion to the sky-reaching 
mountain of the north, rich in gold (comp. Is. 14^^, and Sayce, 
Academy, Jan. 28, 1882, p. 64) and the myth-derived synonyms 
for Sheol, Death, Abaddon, and ' the shadow of death ' (or, deep 
gloom), 26^ 28^2, 38^^ also the 'king of terrors' (18^^), who like 
Pluto or Yama rules in the Hebrew Underworld. Observe, too, 
the instances in which a primitive myth has died down into a 
metaphor, e.g. ' the eyelids of the Dawn ' (3^, 41^^). . . . How far 
the poet of Job believed in the myths which he has preserved, e.g. 
in the existence of potentates or potencies corresponding to the 
' dragon ' of which he speaks, we cannot certainly tell. Mr. Budge 
has suggested that Tiamat, the sky-dragon of the Babylonians, 
conveyed a distinct symbolic meaning. However this may have 
been, the ' leviathan ' of Job was probably to the poet a ' survival ' 
from a superstition of his childhood, and little if anything more 
than the emblem of all evil and disorder." ^ 



2. Legendary Sources 

Legends constitute the form in which historical material is 
handed down from generation to generation in oral transmis- 
sion, especially in times prior to written literature. Holy 
Scripture uses a great abundance of these legends. The popu- 
lar imagination embellishes them ; changes them in many ways 
as to time, place, and circumstances; and onl}^ preserves the 
substance of the truth and fact. As an illustration we may 
take the patriarch's representation that his wife was his sister. 
1 Cheyne, Job and Solomon, 1887, pp. 76-78. 



558 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

There are three narratives of this event. ^ Doubtless there was an 
actual occurrence of this kind in the times of the patriarchs ; but 
each one of these narratives shows the legendary embellishment. 

The Ephraimitic narrative represents that Abraham w^as the 
patriarch and that the event took place at the court of Abime- 
lech, king of Gerer. But the Judaic narrator already found 
two stories current in liis time, one making Abraham the hero, 
the other Isaac ; the one putting the event at the court of Pha- 
raoh, the other at the court of Abimelech. Historical criticism 
cannot do otherwise than regard these as three legends of one 
and the same event. ^ 

Another example is the story of the slaying of the giant 
Goliath. I shall here quote Kent's compact statement : 

" The language and representation of chapter 16^'^^, proclaim 
its affinity with the later stratum of narrative contained in 
8, 12, and 15. The remainder of the chapter, however, is old. 
This records the introduction of the youthful David, already ' a 
mighty man of valor, and a man of war and prudent of speech ' 
(16^*), to the court of Saul, and of his winning the favor of the 
king until the latter makes him his armor-bearer. If we had not 
discovered that the book of Samuel is a compilation, we should 
share with the translators of the Septuagint the difficulty which 
led them to leave out a large part of the following chapter in the 
fruitless endeavor to reconcile it Avith the preceding. For chap- 
ter 17^-18^ tells of the victory of the lad David over Goliath, and 
of his subsequent introduction to Saul and his court, who are 
wholly unacquainted with the youthful champion. Even if this 
section be placed before 16^^^, the difficulty is not entirely re- 
moved. It is further increased when we read in 2 Sam. 21^^, ' And 
there was again war with the Philistines at Gob ; and Elhanan, the 
son of Jaare-oregim the Beth-lehemite, slew Goliath the Gittite, 
the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam ^ (cf. 1 Sam. 
17'). Evidently here are distinct narratives handed down through 
different channels. Whether the Goliath mentioned was actually 
slain by David or Elhanan can never be absolutely determined. 
The statement of 1 Chr. 20^, that it was a brother ' of Goliath 
who fell by the hand of Elhanan, seems to be an endeavor of the 
later chronicler to harmonize the two statements in Samuel. It is 

1 Gen. 121(^20 (j)^ 20 (E), 266-ii (J). 

2 See Sayce, Early History of the Hehreus, pp. Q-k-Qo. He admits different 
versions here. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 559 

by no means impossible, however, that in some one of the many 
forays of the Philistines into Jndah the youthful David slew the 
champion of the Philistines. The memory of the act was pre- 
served among David's kinsmen, the Judeans, until at last it found 
a place in the prophetic history which is our great source for the 
period. Certainly, some such deed or deeds he performed before 
he gained the reputation of being ^ a mighty man of valor,' which 
he bore when introduced to Saul's court. His subsequent record 
confirms this conclusion." ^ 

3. Poetical Sources 

A very large amount of ancient poetry is given either in 
whole or in fragments in the historical prose of the Old Testa- 
ment. A large part of this poetry is given by the Ephraimitic 
writers, such as the birth-song of Isaac,^ the blessings of Isaac,^ 
the blessings of the sons of Joseph,* the ode of the Red Sea,^ 
the oath against Araalek,^ Yahweh's word establishing the royal 
priesthood of Israel,^ the calling of Moses,^ the citation from the 
book of the wars of Yahweh,^ the song of the fountain ,i^ the ode 
of triumph over Moab,i^the oracles of Balaam,^ the blessings of 
Moses,^^ the song of Deborah,^* the fable of Jotham,i^ the pro- 
tests of Samuel,^^ the extract from the ode of victory. ^^ 

The Judaic writers also cite ancient poetry as follows : The 
blessing of Abraham,^^ the blessing of Rebekah,^^ oracle about 
Jacob,^*^ Jacob's blessing,^^ song of the ark,^^ song of Moses,^^ and 
the great epic of the catastrophes of the fall and the deluge,^* 
the sayings of Samson,^^ the triumph of the Philistines,^^ the 
hymn of Hannah,^^ a saying of Samuel,^^ the refrain of the ode 
of triumph over the Philistines,^ a proverb quoted of David,^^ 

1 Kent, A History of the Hebreio People, 1896, Vol. I. pp. 104-105. 

2 Gen. 21&-'. See p. 393. i3 Dent. 33. 

3 Gen. 272--29- 39-40. See p. 394. i* Jd. 5. See p. 368. 

4 Gen. 4815-16. i9. 20. See pp. 390, 394. is Jd. 9^-15. See p. 416. 

5 Ex. 15. See p. 379. is 1 Sam. 12^, 1522-23. 29. 33. 

6 Ex. 17'6. 7 Ex. 19»-6. 17 1 Sam. 1734-36.45-47. 18 Gen. 12i-3. 
8 Nu. 12&^. 9 Nu. 2114-15. 19 Gen. 246o. See p. 387. 

10 Nu. 2117-18. See p. 390. 20 Qen. 2523. 21 Qen. 492-27. 

11 Nu. 2127-^0. See p. 413. 22 j;^^. 1035^. See p. 387. 

12 Nu. 237-10- 1*-24, 24^9- 15-24. 23 Deut. 321-43. See p. 390. 

24 Gen, 24-4, and the Judaic parts of the narrative of the Deluge. See p. 396, 

25 Jd. 1414- 18, 1516. See p. 416. 27 1 Sam. 2i-io. 29 1 Sam. 18^. See p. 385. 

26 Jd. 1624. 28 1 Sam. 167. 30 1 Sam. 24i3. 



560 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

the covenant with David,i extract from the book of Yashar ; 2 
and also ascribed to David, a saying to Saul,^ the dirge of Saul,* 
the dirge of Abner,^ the hymn of victory,^ and the swan song 
of David.^ 

The Deuteronomic writer only uses a strophe from the ode 
of the battle of Beth Horon.^ 

The priestly narrator begins with the poems of the Creation 
and the Deluge,^ and also gives the blessing of Jacob,i<^ and the 
benediction of the priests. ^^ 

There is also inserted in the book of Kings, Isaiah's prophecy 
against Sennacherib. ^^ The blessing of Melchizedek is given 
in a midrash of uncertain origin. ^^ 

The Chronicler preserves two extracts from an ode describ- 
ing the volunteers of David ^* and several hymns of later date.^^ 

In the aggregate this poetry is more extensive than either 
of the two great collections of Hebrew poetry, the Psalter and 
Proverbs. 

The earlier chapters of the gospel of Luke also contain sev- 
eral canticles and other snatches of poetry derived from a Jew- 
ish Christian community, including the Annunciations,^^ the 
Song of Elizabeth,^^ the Magnificat,^^ the Benedictus,^^ and the 
Nunc Dimittis.20 

4. Ancient Laws 

I have recently shown 21 that Hebrew laws may be classified 
under the technical terms ''words," "commandments," "stat- 
utes," " judgments," and " laws " ; and that each of these terms 
comprehends a group of laws which may be traced to their 
archaeological sources. 

1 2 Sam. 711-16. 6 2 Sam. 333-34. See p. 390. 

2 1 K. 812-13 (LXX). 6 2 Sam. 22 = Ps. 18. See p. 412. 

3 1 Sam. 2415. 7 2 Sam. 23i-'. See p. 402. 

4 2 Sam. 119-27. See p. 390. » jog^^ iQi-'b-Ha. See p. 337. 
9 Gen. 1 and the priestly parts of the story of the Deluge, Gen. 6-8. 

10 Gen. 28^^. i5 1 Chr. 168-36. " 

II Nu. 624-26. See p. 388. 16 Lk. 113-17, 30-33. a-j-s?^ 910-12. 

12 2 K. 1921-34 = Is. 3722-35. IV L]5. 142-45. 18 Lk. 146^5. 

13 Gen. 1419-20. See p. 391. i^ Lk. 168-79. 20 Lk. 229-35. 

14 1 Chr. 128- 18. See pp. 391, 393. 

21 Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch^ new edition, 1897, pp. 242 seq. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 561 

(a) The earliest type of the Hebrew law is the Word, a 
short, terse sentence in the form of " Thou shalt not," or 
" Thou shalt," coming from God through the prophets, begin- 
ning with Moses. The Ten "Words on the two tables are of 
this type.^ So are also the words of the Greater Book of the 
Covenant,^ given by the Ephraimitic writer, and of the Little 
Book of the Covenant,^ given by the Judaic writer. Such 
older words are also embedded in the legislation of the three 
later codes, — the Deuteronomic code, the code of Holiness, 
and the Priest code. They may easily be seen underlying the 
material given in these codes. 

(5) An ancient type of law is the statute. These statutes 
came from the primitive courts of Israel before the institution 
of elders and judges.* These decisions and statutes were 
originally short, crisp sentences inscribed upon stones, and set 
up in public places for the warning of the people, usually with 
the penalty attached. A decalogue of such statutes is pre- 
sented in Deuteronomy apart from the Deuteronomic code.^ 
They are in the participial form ; e.g.: 

Cursed be whoso settetli light by bis father or his mother. 

A group of them is found in the Larger Book of the Covenant 
also.^ They are found occasionally in the later codes,^ but in 
the Deuteronomic code the participial form passes over into the 
form of the third person of the verb ; e.g.: 

A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man.s 
In the code of Holiness these assume the relative clause ^ ; e.g. : 
Any person that eateth any blood that person shall be cut off from his people, lo 

These later statutes evidently came from the courts of the priests, 
(c) The Deuteronomic code has a group of laws which are 
called commandments.^^ These are a further unfolding and a 
later type of the Words, and are prophetic in character. They 
assume the form of the second person plural. They are char- 

1 Z.c, pp. 181 seq. ^Ic, pp. 211 seq. ^ I.e., pp. 189 seq. 

* Then the rulers were called OppPJlS and their decisions D'pn. 
5 Z.c, pp. 239seg. ^ I.e., pp. 217 seq. ^ Z.c, pp. 249 seg. 8 peut. 22^. 
9 The Dpn take the form of mpn and the relative clause is either "itrx IT^X T^K 
or n^K trS3. 1^ Lev. 7^^. ^^ ni2iJa, I.e., pp. 246 seq. 

2o 



562 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

acteristic of the Deuteronomic code ; but they are taken up 
into the code of Holiness and the Priest code, and are also in 
redactional passages of the earlier codes. This is a pentade 
of the type : 

Ye shall break down their altars, 

And ye shall dash in pieces their Mazzeboth, 

And ye shall burn their Asherim with fire, 

And ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, 

And ye shall destroy their name out of that place, i 

(c?) Another type of law is the judgment.^ This is a later 
form of the statute. It gives the decision of a case by a judge,^ 
which becomes a legal precedent. It is always in the form of 
a temporal or conditional clause. The earliest collection of 
these is found in the Greater Book of the Covenant, but they 
are also found embedded in all the subsequent codes. This 
will serve as a specimen : 

"1. If a man steal an ox or a sheep and slaughter it, or sell it, 
five cattle shall he pay for the ox and four sheep for the sheep. 

" 2. If the thief be found while breaking in, and he be smitten 
and die, there shall be no blood-guiltiness for him. 

" 3. If the sun has risen upon him, there shall be blood-guilti- 
ness for him. He shall pay heavily. 

'^ 4. And if he have nothing, he shall be sold for his theft. 

'^5. If the theft be at all found in his hand alive, from ox to 
ass to sheep, he shall pay double."* 

In the judgments of the code of Holiness the type assumes 
the form of a conditional clause with the word " man " prefaced.^ 
And a man, if he smite any person of man, shall be put to a violent death. ^ 

In the Priest code a slightly different form is at times assumed.'' 
(e) It is the usage of the Priest code to use the word " laiu "^ 
for special priestly enactments. In the earlier literature law 
is used of the Law in general, and not of particular laws. 

Thus we have in the law codes, in the technical terms and 
types of law, archaeological evidence of their origin in the vari- 
ous ancient centres, prophetic, judicial, and priestly, which in 
successive generations, under divine guidance, gave laws and 
codified them. 

1 Deut. 123. 3 jsatr?. 6 ^3 ti?^^. 7 ^3 q-[X. 

2 tSBt'to, I.e., pp. 252 seq. * Ex. 2137-223. 6 Lev. 24i7. 8 fi>-nr,. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 663 

5. Documentary Sources 

We have already seen that it is characteristic of Biblical 
History to use earlier documents. The Higher Criticism has 
shown the documentary sources of our Hexateuch in four great 
narratives. It is also at work on these narratives in detail, 
and finds that each of them used still more ancient sources. 
There are several distinct strata of the priestly narratives. 
There are also two strata of the Deuteronomic writers 
clearly marked. The work of distinguishing primary Judaic 
and Ephraimitic writers has not as yet reached such decided 
results ; but we may confidently expect that it will ere long 
attain them. Thus we have disclosed in Hebrew historical 
composition a working over and a reworking over, in several 
stages, of original documents ; which documents, of great an- 
tiquity themselves, used the sources alread}^ pointed out ; and 
thus we are enabled to sift the material and arrange it in the 
order of its genesis, and to test its real historical value. 

So in the New Testament we have at last gained firm ground 
in the two written sources of the synoptic Gospels, the original 
St. Mark and the Logia of St. Matthew. We have still to de- 
termine the other written sources of Luke, and to distinguish 
the apostolic source or sources of the Gospel of John and the 
book of Acts. These problems will eventually be solved ; and 
the historical value of the material will be greatly increased by 
this thorough sifting and arranging. 

There are some who shrink from the late dates to which the 
Higher Criticism refers the historical documents of the Bible 
in their present form. They think this impairs and threatens 
to destroy their historicity. There can be no doubt that near- 
ness to the event is valuable to the historian, and remoteness in 
a measure impairs his testimony. But while this is true, yet 
the historicity of the material is not really impaired by the 
remoteness of the event reported, provided we have sufficient 
evidence that the historian used for his purpose proper sources 
of information, which bridge the chasm between him and the 
event. An early writer who did not use documentary sources 
is really not as reliable an authority as a later writer who did 



564 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

use documentary sources. The evidence that the Higher Criti- 
cism affords for the fidelity of ancient biblical writers to their 
documents — that they used them, just as they were, without any 
apparent effort to harmonize them, or to remove discrepancies — 
is a strong evidence of their historicity. As Robertson says : 

" It seems to be too readily assumed and too readily admitted, 
that contemporaneousness and credibility of documents are neces- 
sarily inseparable, or to be inferred as a matter of course one from 
the other. A moment's reflection will show that an event may 
have historically occurred, and that we may have good evidence 
of it, even although no account of it was written down at the 
moment of its occurrence ; as also that false statements in regard 
to certain matters of fact may be made, and put on record at the 
time of the actual occurrences. The mere writing down of these 
at the time does not make them credible, nor does the omission 
to write those make them incredible. Assyrian and Egyptian 
kings may lie upon stone monuments — very probably they did — 
in regard to events of their own day ; and Hebrew historians may 
tell us a true story of their history, though they wrote it long 
after the events. The point to be established is, that for the bib- 
lical theory of the history it does not matter who wrote the histori- 
cal books. The theory does indeed imply that those books con- 
tain true history ; but its acceptance of the facts does not depend 
on a knowledge of who wrote them down ; for on this point the 
books themselves are for the most part silent. Moses may have 
written much, or may have written little, of what is contained in 
the Pentateuch ; it will remain unknown who were the authors of 
the succeeding books : our knowledge of these things would not 
necessarily guarantee the history. The biblical theory, as an 
account of the manner in which things took place, does not stand 
or fall by the determination of the contemporaneousness of docu- 
ments, and the modern theory certainly has no higher claim to the 
possession of contemporary sources for its support." ^ 

VIII. The Historic Imagiitation 

After all has been said as to the use of the sources of the 
biblical historians, there can be no doubt that they also used 
their historical imagination. This is not a fault. It is an 
excellence. It is an essential quality of all the best historic 

1 Robertson, The Earhj Beligion of Israel, 1892, pp. 46-47. 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 5Q5 

writing in all ages. It is doubtful whether better examples of 
its use can be found than in the biblical histories. We have 
to remember that the writers of biblical history were aiming 
above all to be religious teachers ; and that they did not study 
the histories with a purely historic interest, but with a very 
practical interest, as prophets or as priests. 
As Kent says: 

"From these many sources the prophets gleaned their illustra- 
tions and the data wherewith they reconstructed the outlines of 
their nation's history, which was itself a supreme illustration of 
the truths concerning Jehovah which they wished to impress. 
Scientific or historic accuracy they did not claim. One's respect, 
however, for the Old Testament and the work of the prophets 
deepens when it is perceived that they were subject to all the 
limitations of an era when scientific methods of investigation 
were unknown and the exact historic spirit still unborn. The 
scientific and historical variations are in themselves proofs of the 
truth of the divine message which was thus given forth in a 
form attractive and intelligible to all." ^ 

Therefore we have to take into account the point of 
view of those priests who wrote the priestly section of the 
Hexateuch and the work of the Chronicler. Their priestly 
interest determined their choice of material, the use they made 
of it, and the colours and shading which their imagination put 
upon it. There can be no doubt that they idealize the history 
in the interests of the priesthood and the temple and the 
Levitical law. 

So the point of view of the Deuteronomic writers is the 
Deuteronomic Law, and they judge the history by that Law, 
and they idealize Moses and the entire previous history in the 
light of that Law. Even the earlier prophets, who wrote 
the Ephraimitic and Judaic narratives, wrote in the prophetic 
interests of their times. ^ 

We may say with reference to them all that they did not, 
and could not, distinguish between truth and the fiction in any 
of the older legends and historic documents at their disposal. 
They could not separate the bare fact from its mythical, leg- 

1 Kent, A History of the Hebrew People, 1896, p. 12. 

2 See Briggs, Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch, new ed., 1897, pp. 126 seq. 



566 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

endary, and poetic embellisliment. Indeed, they preferred it 
as thus embellished, for it was more appropriate in this form 
for their purpose of instruction. Furthermore, it is evident 
that they did not hesitate to indulge themselves in historical 
fiction where they had not sufficient historic information and 
the lessons had yet to be taught. Midrashim of this sort are 
incorporated here and there throughout the history. It is only 
by the use of the Higher Criticism assisted by historical criti- 
cism that they can be eliminated. 

There is no evidence that the Divine Spirit guided these his- 
torians in their historic investigations so as to keep them from 
historic errors. The Divine Spirit guided them in their re- 
ligious instruction in the lessons they taught from history. 
But there is no evidence of other guidance. The evidence is 
all against such guidance as prevented them from making 
historic errors. They certainly did record error. The words 
of Ottley are appropriate here : 

'' On a survey of the ground we have traversed, it appears that 
there are good reasons for believing that the inspired writers give 
a presentation of the facts which is not primarily historical, but 
prophetic, their main design being that of religious edification. 
It follows that we can await with equanimity the verdict of 
criticism in regard to the exact historical worth of the narra- 
tive. That there is a great regard for certain outstanding facts 
of the history is unquestionable, but the facts are often col- 
oured by high imaginative power, and are estimated according 
to moral significance. In regard to minor details there is ample 
room for diversity of opinion. To take two passing illustra- 
tions. The religious lessons of Samson's history are not ma- 
terially affected by any particular view respecting the precise 
character of the narrative which describes his career. The por- 
trait of David is not the less a treasure for all time because to a 
great extent it is idealized by devout writers of a later age. The 
important question is whether, in their interpretation of Israel's 
history, the prophetic writers of the Old Testament are fundamen- 
tally wrong. We have found reasons for supposing that in its 
general point of view 'the prophetic philosophy of history' is 
true, and we may accept the cautious summary of Professor Eob- 
ertson as fairly stating our conclusions. ' The great events,' he 
says, ' of Israel's history, the turning-points, the points determina- 
tive of the whole life and history, are attested by the nation at 



BIBLICAL HISTORY 567 

the earliest time at whicli we are enabled to look for materials on 
which an opinion can be based. No reason can be given for the 
invention of them just at this time, or for the significance which 
the prophets assign to them. It may be that a fond memory 
invested with a halo of glory the great fathers of the race; 
it may also be that a simple piety saw wonders where a modern 
age would see none. Yet the individuality of the characters is 
not destroyed, nor are the sequence of events and the delineations 
of character shown to be the work of a fitful and unbridled imagi- 
nation.' " ^ 

It is quite true that from this point of view it is difficult to 
draw the line between historic fact and historic fiction ; and 
to many minds it is painful to transfer that material to the 
realm of fiction which they had always supposed was safe in 
the realm of historic fact. It is still more difficult for some 
minds to be unable to draw the lines and to be left in uncer- 
tainty. Nevertheless this is the exact situation in which we 
are left in the study of Biblical History ; and the only thing we 
can do, so far as the study of that history is concerned, is faith- 
fully to apply the principles of Historical Criticism and to abide 
by the results. We cannot change the facts, discolour them or 
distort them, in order to ease the intellectual and moral difficul- 
ties of those who are loath to accept the results of Historical 
Criticism. If these persons are unwilling to make the investi- 
gations themselves, they must be content to abide the decision 
that may be reached by scholars who reverently and conscien- 
tiously, and yet rigorously and thoroughly, make the necessary 
researches. 

But apart from the interests of history, it makes not the 
slightest difference so far as the teaching of the Bible as to 
faith and morals is concerned, how greatly the proportions of 
fact and fiction, of the real and ideal, may be changed in the 
progress of Historical Criticism, so long as the great historic 
events upon which our religion depends remain unimpeached. 
To impeach the historicity of the incarnation and the resurrec- 
tion of our Lord destroys the Christian religion. Some critics 
seek to do this by the use of Historical Criticism ; but Histori- 
cal Criticism is really the sure weapon which God has put into 
1 Ottley, Aspects of the Old Testament, 1897, pp. 156-158. 



568 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

our hands to vindicate everything which is really historical. 
Historical Criticism enables us successfully to sift the entire 
material and to separate the wood, hay, straw, and stubble of 
human opinion from the gold and gems of the real historical 
and everlasting city and kingdom of God. 

At Constantinople one sees the greatest and noblest of all 
Christian churches transformed into a Mahometan mosque. 
The cross was displaced by the crescent, the towers by the 
minarets, and the beautiful mosaic work, telling in pictorial 
art the wonders of the life of Christ and of Christian history 
encircling the dome, was plastered over and hidden from the 
eyes of men for centuries. The plastering is beginning to dis- 
appear, and keen eyes can see through it the outline of the 
mosaic work which still exists behind. Some day when the 
Church has gained possession of this metropolitan cathedral of 
the East, it will remove all this plastering, cut down the cres- 
cent and the minarets, elevate the cross, and the story of 
Christ and Christianity will once more shine from every part 
of the Church of the Divine Wisdom. Just so the true Biblical 
History has been plastered over for centuries by traditional 
theories. Men have been adding layer on layer to these tradi- 
tions. The Keformation began to rub them off. But the 
reactionary age conserved those which were left and plastered 
others on. Modern Historical Criticism will not cease its work 
until they have all been removed once for all and forever. 
Critics are determined to know the true Biblical History for 
themselves and for all men. 



CHAPTER XXIII 

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 

Biblical Theology, as a theological discipline, had its 
origin in the effort to throw off from the Bible the accumulated 
traditions of scholasticism, guard it from the perversions of 
mysticism, and defend it from the attacks of rationalism. Its 
growth has been through a struggle with these abnormal ten- 
dencies. It has finally developed into a well-defined discipline, 
presenting the unity of the Scriptures as a divine organism, 
and justly estimating the various human types of religion, doc- 
trine, and morals. 

I. The Four Types of Theology 

The Bible is the divine revelation as it has become fixed and 
permanent in written documents of various persons in different 
periods of history, collected in one body called the Canon, or 
Holy Scripture. All Christian theology should be founded on 
the Bible, and yet the theologians of the various Christian 
churches, and of the several periods of Christian history, have 
differed greatly in their use of the Bible. Each age has its 
own providential problems to solve in the progress of our race 
and seeks in the Divine Word for their solution, looking from 
the point of view of its own immediate and peculiar necessities. 
Each temperament of human nature approaches the Bible from 
its own needs. The subjective and the objective, the form and 
the substance of knowledge, the real and the ideal, are ever 
readjusting themselves to the advancing generations. If the 
Bible were a codex of laws, or a system of doctrines, there 
would still be room for difference of attitude and interpretation ; 
but inasmuch as the Bible is rather a collection of various kinds 

569 



570 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

of literature, — poetry and prose, history and story, oration and 
epistle, sentence of v/isdom and dramatic incident, — and is, as 
a whole, concrete rather than abstract, the room for difference 
of attitude and interpretation is greatly enhanced. Principles 
are not always distinctly given ; they must ordinarily be derived 
from a concrete body of truth and facts, and concrete relations ; 
and everything depends upon the point of view, method, process, 
and the spirit with which the study is conducted. 

1. Thus the mystic spirit arising from an emotional nature 
and unfolding into a more or less refined aesthetic sense, seeks 
union and communion with God, direct, immediate, and vital, 
through the religious feeling. It either strives by mystic 
insight to break through the forms of religion to the spiritual 
substance, or else by the imagination sees in the sensuous 
outlines of divine manifestation and its colours of beauty and 
grandeur, allegories to be interpreted by the religious aesthetic 
taste. The religious element is disproportionately unfolded, 
to the neglect of the doctrinal and ethical. This mystic spirit 
exists in all ages and in most religions, but it was especially 
prominent in the Ante-Nicene Church, and in Greek and 
Oriental Christianity, and it was distinguished by intense 
devotion and too exclusive absorption in the contemplation of 
God and of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. Its exegesis is 
characterized by the allegorical method. 

2. The scholastic spirit seeks union and communion with 
God by means of well-ordered forms. It searches the Bible 
for well-defined systems of law and doctrine by which to rule 
the Church and control the world. It arises from an intel- 
lectual nature, and grows into a more or less acute logical 
sense, and a taste for systems of order. This spirit exists in 
all ages and in most religions, but it was especially dominant 
in the middle age of the Church and in Latin Christianity. 
It is distinguished by an intense legality and by too exclusive 
attention to the works of the law, and a disproportionate con- 
sideration of the sovereignty of God, the sinfulness of man, 
and the satisfaction to be rendered to God for sin. In biblical 
studies it is distinguished by the legal, analytic method of 
interpretation, carried on at times with such hair-splitting dis- 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 571 

tinction and subtilty of reasoning that Holy Scripture be- 
comes, as it were, a magician's book. Through the device of 
the manifold sense the Bible is made as effectual to the purpose 
of the dogmatician for proof texts as are the sacraments to the 
priests in their magical operation. The doctrinal element pre- 
vails over the religious and ethical. Dogma and institution 
alike work ex o'pere operato, 

3. The speculative spirit seeks union and communion with 
God through the human reason, and, like the mystic spirit, 
disregards the form, but from another point of view. Under 
the guide of conscience it develops into a more or less pure 
ethical sense. It works with honest doubt and inquisitive 
search after truth, for the solution of the great problems of the 
world and man. It is distinguished by an intense rationality 
and morality. It yearns for a conscience at peace with God 
and working in faith toward God and love toward man. This 
has been the prevailing spirit in the Germanic world since the 
Reformation, and is still the characteristic spirit of our age. 
The Church, its institutions and doctrines, the Sacred Script- 
ures themselves, are subjected to earnest criticism in the 
honest search for moral and redemptive truth, and the eternal 
ideas of right, which are good forever, and are approved by 
the reason. The ethical element prevails over the religious 
and the doctrinal. 

4. The practical spirit seeks union and communion with 
God in various forms of Christian life and work. It aims to 
obey the word of God and do the will of God. It is distin- 
guished by an intense interest and enthusiasm for all kinds of 
religious activity. In biblical studies it seeks above all, prac- 
tical exegesis and the application of the teachings of Holy 
Scripture to human conduct. This spirit is a special charac- 
teristic of the Anglo-Saxon race, and it is dominant in British 
and American Christianity. 

5. The truly catholic spirit combines what is true and of 
advantage in all these tendencies of human nature. Born of 
the Holy Spirit, it is ever appropriating all the faculties and 
powers of man, and eliminating therefrom defective and abnor- 
mal tendencies and habits. It is reverent, believing, loving 



572 STUDY or holy scripture 

approach to God through the means of grace. It is above all 
vital union and communion with the Triune God in the forms 
of divine appointment, and the love and service of God and the 
brethren with all the faculties. It uses the form in order to 
the substance. It is inquiring, obedient, devout, and reforma- 
tory. It combines the subject and the object of knowledge, 
and aims to realize the ideal. It unites the devotional with 
the legal and moral habits and attitudes. It strives to unite 
in the Church the various types of human experience in order 
to complete manhood, and the completion of the kingdom of 
God in the golden age of the Messiah, 

This spirit is the spirit of our Saviour, who speaks to us 
through four evangelists in the various types, in order to give 
us a complete and harmonious representation of Himself. This 
is the spirit which combines the variety of the Old and New 
Testament writers into the unity of the Holy Spirit. This is 
the spirit which animated the Christian Church in its great 
advancing epochs, when a variety of leaders, guided by the 
Holy Spirit, combined the types into comprehensive move- 
ments. This was the underlying and moving principle of the 
Reformation, where vital religion combined with great intel- 
lectual activity and moral earnestness to produce the churches 
of Protestant Christianity. 

The great initial movements by which the Christian Church 
advanced in every age combined the variety of forces into 
harmonious operation; but these in every case gave way to 
reaction and decline, in which the various forces separated 
themselves, and some particular one prevailed. So it was 
again in the seventeenth century after the Reformation. The 
successors of the Reformers, declining from their vital religion 
and moral vigour, broke up into various antagonistic parties 
in the different national churches, in hostility with one another, 
marring the harmony of catholic truth and the principles of the 
Reformation. The reaction first began with those who had 
inherited the scholastic spirit from the Middle Age, and sub- 
stituted a Protestant scholasticism for the mediaeval scholasti- 
cism in the Lutheran and Reformed churches of the continent, 
and a Protestant ecclesiasticism for a papal ecclesiasticism in 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 573 

the churches of Great Britain. The Scriptures again became the 
slaves of dogmatic systems and ecclesiastical machinery, and 
again they were reduced to the menial service of furnishing 
proof texts to the foregone conclusions of dogmaticians and 
ecclesiastics. 

The French Huguenots and British Puritans, in their strug- 
gles against persecution, maintained a vital religion, and 
reacted to the unfolding of the mystic type of theology. They 
devoted their attention to works of piety, to union and com- 
munion with God, and to the practical application of the 
Scriptures to Christian life, holding fast to the covenant of 
grace as the principle of their entire theology, while they 
distinguished between a theoretical and a practical divinity, 
presenting the former in the common Reformed sense, but 
advancing the latter to a very high degree of development, the 
best expression of which is found in the Westminster symbols.^ 
Puritanism had, however, within itself antagonistic elements, 
which separated themselves after the composition of the West- 
minster standards, into various types, and the Puritan spirit 
largely became stereotyped in the Puritanical spirit. On the 
one side it reacted to scholasticism in the school of the great 
Independent divine, John Owen, and on the other into mys- 
ticism, in the many separating churches of Great Britain. 

1 Jolin Dury, one of the Westminster divines, a Scotchman, the great peace- 
maker of his age, in his work, An Earnest Plea for Gospel Communion^ sheds 
much light upon this subject. He defines practical divinity to be "a system or 
collection of divine truth relating to the practice of piety." The great majority 
of the writings of the Puritan divines and Westminster men are upon this 
theme. It embraces Chaps. XIX. -XXXI. of the Westminster Confession of 
Faith, the larger part of the Catechisms, and, indeed, the more characteristic, 
the abler, and the better parts. William Gouge (also member of Westminster 
Assembly) in 1633 headed a petition of the London ministers to Archbishop 
Ussher to frame a system of Practical Divinity, as a bond of union among 
Protestants, distinguishing between essentials and circumstantials. John Dury, 
in 1654, presents such an outline himself, working it out on the principle of the 
covenant of grace. He says: " Nor is it possible (as I conceive) ever to unite 
the Professors of Christianity to each other, to heal their breaches and divisions 
in Doctrine and Practice, and to make them live together, as brethren in one 
spirit ought to do, without the same sense of the Covenant by which they may 
be made to perceive the terms upon which God doth unite all those that are 
His children unto Himself." — p. 19, An Earnest Plea for Gospel Communion, 
London, 1654. 



514: STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Puritanism passed over to the continent through William 
Ames and others, and in the school of Cocceius maintained a 
more biblical cast of doctrine in the system of the covenants. 
It afterward gave birth to Pietism in Reformed and Lutheran 
Germany, producing the biblical school of Bengel and the 
Moravians ; and subsequently bursting forth in England in 
the form of Methodism, which is a genuine child of Puritanism 
in the stress that it lays upon piety and a Christian life, 
although it shares with all these movements that have grown 
out of Puritanism the common fault of undue emphasis upon 
the religious element, and of a more or less exaggerated mysti- 
cism, to the neglect of the doctrinal and the ethical. 

The school of Saumur in France, the school of Calixtus in 
Germany, and the Cambridge Platonists in England (who were 
Puritan in origin and training) revived the ethical type and 
strove to give the human reason its proper place and functions 
in matters of religion, and prepared the way for a broad, com- 
prehensive Church. They were accompanied, however, by a 
more active movement, which, by an undue emphasis of the 
rational and the ethical, followed John Goodwin, ^ Biddle,^ and 
Hobbes ^ into a movement which in England assumed the form 
of Deism, in France of Atheism, in Holland of Pantheism, 
and in Germany of Rationalism. And thus the four great 
types became antagonized both within the national churches, 
in struggling parties, and without the national churches, in 
separating churches and hostile forms of religion and irreligion, 
of philosophy and of science. And so the spirit of the Refor- 
mation was crushed between the contending parties, and its 
voice drowned for a while by the clamour of partisanship. The 
struggle continued into the present century, but has been modi- 
fied since Schleiermacher in the growth of the evangelical spirit 

1 John Goodwin was the greatest leader of the Independents in their struggle 
against a dominant Presbyterianism. He was a most prolific writer and skilful 
combatant. It is astonishing how much he has been neglected by the Inde- 
pendents, who eventually preferred the scholastic Owen and the mystic Thomas 
Goodwin to him. 

2 Biddle was the leader of the Unitarians of the period of the Common- 
wealth, the author of the Larger and Shorter Catechism of the Unitarians, in 
opposition to the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms. 

3 Hobbes was the great political philosopher of the period. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 575 

SO as to become the potent reconciling force of the nineteenth 
century.^ 

II. The Eise of Biblical Theology 

It was in the midst of this conflict of theological types that 
Biblical Theology had its origin and historical development. 
It was first during the conflict between Rationalism and Super- 
naturalism in Germany that the need of a Biblical Theology 
began to be felt. Holy Scripture was the common battle-field 
of Protestants, and each party strove to present the Scripture 
from its own peculiar point of view; and it became important 
to distinguish the teachings of .the Scripture itself from the 
teachings of the schools and the theologians of the contending 
parties. This was attempted almost simultaneously from both 
sides of the conflict. G. T. Zacharia, a pupil of Baumgarten 
at Halle, and a decided supernaturalist,^ sought to compare the 
biblical ideas with the Church doctrine in order to correct and 
purify the latter. He would base Dogmatics on the Scriptures, 
which alone can prove and correct the system. The author 
speaks of the advancing economy of redemption, but has no 
conception of an organic development.^ Soon after, C. F. 
Ammon issued his work on Biblical Theology.* Ammon was 
a rationalist. Miracles and prophecy were rejected as unten- 
able because they would not bear critical and historical inves- 
tigation. Ammon would gather material from the Bible for a 
dogmatic system without regard to the system that might be 
built upon it.^ Thus from both sides the scholastic system 
was undermined by the scriptural investigation. 

1 The various types are not always found in their strength and purity as 
divergent forces, but frequently in a more or less mixed condition. Thus the 
Cambridge Platonists, while predominantly rational and ethical, were also char- 
acterized by the mystic spirit, especially in the case of Henry Moore. The 
Puritans, William Perkins and William Ames, combined the scholastic and 
mystic types. The scholastic and the rational were combined in Calixtus and 
Arminius. This might be illustrated by numerous examples. 

2 Bihl. Theol. oder Untersuchung des biblischen Grundes der vornehmsten 
theologischen Lehren, 1772. 

3 See Tholuck's view of him in Herzog, Heal Uncy., Ite Auf., xviii. p. 351. 

* Entwurf einer reinen Bihl. Theologie, 1792, and Biblische Theologie, 1801. 
5 Tholuck regards his Biblical Theology as a fundamental one for the his- 
torico-critical rationalism. See Herzog, Ite Aufl. , xix. pp. 54 seq. 



576 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

In the meanwhile Michaelis, Griesbach, and Eichhorn had 
given a new impetus to biblical studies. J. F. Gabler first 
laid the foundations of Biblical Theology as a distinct theo- 
logical discipline.^ He was the pupil and friend of Eichhorn 
and Griesbach, who influenced him and largely determined his 
theological position. He presented the historical principle as 
the distinguishing feature of Biblical Theology over against a 
system of Dogmatics. ^ Gabler himself did not work out his 
principles into a system, but left this as an inheritance to his 
successors. Lorenzo Baur^ defines Biblical Theology as a 
development, pure and unmixed with foreign elements, of the 
religious theories of the Jews, of Jesus, and the apostles, 
according to the different historical periods, the varied acquire- 
ments and views of the sacred writers, as derived from their 
writings. He sought to determine the universal principles 
which would apply to all times and individuals. He would 
from the shell of biblical ideas get the kernel of the universal 
religion.* De Wette ^ sought to separate the essential from the 
non-essential by religious philosophical reflection. He would 
exclude the local, the temporal, and the individual in order to 
attain the universal religion. He made the advance of treating 
Biblical Theology in periods, and of distinguishing the charac- 
teristic features of Hebraism and Judaism, of Christ and His 
apostles; but in his treatment the dogmatic element has too 
great prominence given to it, so that he justly gives his work the 

1 In an academic discourse : dejusto discnmine theologice biblicce et dogmaticcn 
regundisque recte utriusque flnibus, 1787. 

2 Gabler was a man of the type of Eichhorn and Herder, on the borders 
of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, from whom the fructifying influ- 
ences upon the Evangelical Theology of the nineteenth century went forth. 
He laboured for many years as professor at Jena, and worked for the ad- 
vancement of Biblical and Historical Learning with an intense moral earnest- 
ness. 

3 Bihl. Theol. d. N. T., 1800-1802. 

* P. C. Kaiser's Bihlische Theologie oder Judaismus und Christianismus 
nach grammatisch-historischen Interpretationsmethode und nach einer frei- 
muthigen Stellung in die kritisch vergleichende Universalgeschichte der Belig- 
ion und die universale Beligion (Bd. I., 1813 ; II. a, 1814 ; II. b., 1821) is of 
the same point of view. 

^ Bihl. Dograatik des Alt. 7ind Neuen Testaments oder kritische Darstellung 
der Beligionslehre des Hebraismus, des Jiidenthicms, des Urcliristenthums., 1813, 
3te Aufl., 1831. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 577 

title, Biblical Dogmatics.^ W. Vatke,^ in 1835, issued an able 
and instructive work, discussing fully the essential character 
of the biblical religion in relation to the idea of religion. He 
divides his theme into two parts, presenting the religion of the 
Old and the New Testaments. The first part is subdivided 
into two stages : the Bloom and the Decay, historically traced. 
The author also divides into a general and a special part ; the 
former alone has been published, and is entirely speculative 
in character. It does not consider the individualities of the 
authors, and shows no real advance beyond L. Baur and De 
Wette ; ^ although he prepares the way for the school of Reuss, 
by his use of the philosophy of Hegel for a new conception of 
the development of the religion of Israel.* Daniel von Coln^ 
carries out the historical method more thoroughly than any of 
his predecessors, and presents a much more complete system, 
but he does not escape the speculative trammels of his prede- 
cessors. He presents the following principles of Biblical 
Theology : 

"(1) To carefully distinguish the times and authors, and the 
mediate as well as the immediate presentation of doctrine ; (2) To 
strongly maintain the religious ideas of the authors themselves ; 

(3) To present and explain the symbolical mythical forms and 
their relation to the pure ideas and convictions of the authors ; 

(4) To explain the relation of the authors and their methods to 
the external conditions of the people, the time and the place 
under which they were trained ; (5) To search for the origin of 
the ideas in their primitive forms." ^ 

1 L. F. 0. Baumgarten Crusius' Grundzuge der Biblischen Theologie, 1828, 
is of slight importance, reacting from the advances made by L. Baur and De 
Wette. 

2 Beligion des Alten Testaments nach den Jcanonischen Buchern entwickelt^ 
as the first part of a Biblical Theology. 

3 It has recently come into prominence, owing to the author's vie\YS of Old 
Testament Literature, which are in agreement with those of Reuss and Kuenen, 
at the basis of the Critical Theories of Wellhausen. J. C. F. Steudel's Vor- 
lesungen ilber die Theologie des Alten Testaments nach dessen Tode heraus- 
gegeben von G. F. Oehler, 1840, is still on the older ground, taking Biblical 
Theology to be "the systematic survey of the religious ideas which are found 
in the writings of the Old Testament," including the Apocryphal, without dis- 
tinction of periods or authors or writings, all arranged under the topics : Man, 
God, and the relation between God and Man. 

4 See p. 499. s :Bibl. TheoL, 1836. e :Bibl. Theologie, L p. 30. 

2p 



5T8 STUDY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 

De Wette and Von Coin recognize a difference of the authors, 
but not from any inner peculiarity of the authors themselves, 
but from the external conditions of time, place, and circum- 
stances. The authors are placed side by side without any real 
conception of their differences or of their unity. The historical 
principle is applied and worked out, but in an external fashion, 
and the relation to the universal religion and to other religions 
is considered, rather than the interrelation of the various doc- 
trines and types of the Scriptures themselves. 

III. Developme^^t of Biblical Theology 

This was the condition of affairs when Strauss issued his 
Lif^ of Jesus^ and sought, by arraying one New Testament 
writer against another, as F. Baur justly charges against him, 
to prove the incompetence of all the witnesses and reduce the 
life of Jesus to a myth.^ F. Baur himself sought by the 
historico-critical process to show the natural development of 
Christianity out of the various forces brought into conflict with 
each other in the first and second Christian centuries, reducing 
the life and teachings of Jesus to a minimum. Neander grap- 
pled with the mythical hypothesis of Strauss, and the develop- 
ment hypothesis of F. Baur, and sought to construct a life of 
Jesus and a history of the apostolic Church, resting upon a 
sound historical criticism of the New Testament writings. ^ He 
introduced a new principle into Biblical Theology, and made it 
a section in his History of the Apostles. He sought to distin- 
guish the individualities of the various sacred writers in their 
conception of Christianity and to unite them in a higher unity. 

" The doctrine of Christ was not to be given to man as a stiff 
and dead letter, in a fixed and inflexible form, but, as the word of 

1 F. Baur, Krit. Untersuch. in d. kann. Evang.^ p. 71 ; F. Baur, KircJien- 
geschichtc des 19 Jahrhunderts, p. 397. Strauss replies in his Lehen Jesu f. d. 
deutsche Volk., p. Si. See pp. 493 seq. 

^ GescJiichte der Pflanzung iind Leitiing der christUchen Kirche durch die 
Apostel, 1832, 5te Aufl., 1862 ; translated into English in Biblical Cabinet, Edin- 
burgh, 1812 ; Bohn's Library, London, 1856 ; translated by J. E. Kyland, revised 
and corrected according to the 4th German edition by E. G. Kobinson, N, Y., 
1865. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 579 

the Spirit and of life, -was to be proclaimed in and by its life in 
living variation and variety. Men enlightened by the Divine 
Spirit canght up these doctrines and appropriated them in a living 
manner according to their respective differences in education and 
life. These differences were to manifest the living unity, the rich- 
ness and depth of the Christian spirit according to the various 
modes of human conception, unconsciously complementing and 
explaining each other. For Christianity is meant for all men, 
and can adapt itself to the most varied human characters, trans- 
form them and unite them in a higher unity. For the various 
peculiarities and fundamental tendencies in human nature are 
designed to work in and with one another at all times for the 
realization of the idea of humanity, the presentation of the king- 
dom of God in humanity."^ 

Neander thus gave to Biblical Theology a new and important 
feature that was indispensable for the further development of 
the discipline. Neander's presentation has still many defects. 
It is kept in a too subordinate position to his history. But he 
takes the stand so necessary for the growth of Biblical Theology 
that the theology of the various authors is to be determined 
from their own characters and the essential and fundamental 
conceptions of their own writings. Neander presents as the 
central idea of Paul, the Law and righteousness, which give 
the connection as well as contrast between his original and final 
conceptions. The fundamental idea of James is, that Chris- 
tianity is the perfect law. John's conception is, that divine life 
is in communion with the Redeemer ; death, in estrangement 
from Him. 

Schmid, a colleague of F. Baur at Tiibingen, first gave 
Biblical Theology its proper place in Theological Encyclo- 
peedia.^ He defined Biblical Theology as belonging essen- 
tially to the department of Exegetical Theology. "We 
understand by Biblical Theology of the New Testament the 
historico-genetic presentation of Christianity as this is given 
in the canonical writings of the New Testament ; a discipline 
which is essentially distinguished from Systematic Theology 

1 Gesch. d. Pf. und Lett., Gotha, 5te Aufl., p. 501. 

2 In his invaluable essay, "Ueber das Interesse und den Stand d. Bibl. Theo. 
des Neu. Test, in unserer Zeit," Tiibinger Zeitschrift f. TJieo., 4te Heft., 1838, 
pp. 126, 129. 



580 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

by its historical character, while by its limitation to the bibli- 
cal writings of the New Testament, it is separated from His- 
torical Theology, and is characterized as a part of Exegetical 
Theology. Of this last it constitutes the summit by which 
Exegetical Theology is connected with the roots of Systematic 
as well as Historical Theology, and even touches Practical 
Theology." _ Schmid regards Christianity as the fulfilment 
of the Old Covenant, which consists of Law and Promise. ^ 
He seeks to present Christianity in its unity with the Old 
Testament as well as in its contrast thereto. He thus gains 
four possibilities of doctrine, which are realized in the four 
principal apostles. James presents Christianity as the fulfilled 
Law ; Peter, as the fulfilled Promise ; Paul, as contrasted with 
the Law ; and John, as contrasted with both Law and Promise. 
For many years he lectured on the Theology of the New Tes- 
tament. These lectures were published after his death by 
his pupils. 2 

Oehler (G. F.), also of the university of Tubingen, takes 
the same position with reference to the Old Testament.^ He 
defines the Theology of the Old Testament as " the historico- 
genetic presentation of the revealed religion contained in the 
canonical writings of the Old Testament." His lectures were 
first issued in 1873-1874,* by his son. Oehler distinguishes in 
the Old Testament three parts : Mosaism, Prophetism, and the 
Chokma — the first fundamental ; the Prophetism representing 
the objective side, and the Chokma the subjective ; these two 
unfolding in parallelism with one another. Thus he marks an 
advance in the Old Testament in the discrimination of types, 
corresponding with the distinguishing of types in the New 
Testament by Neander and Schmid.^ Schmid and Oehler 
combine in giving us organic systems of Biblical Theology 

1 Bih. Theo., p. 367. 

2 Bihlische Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1853, 4th ed., 1869. Translated 
into English, but without the invaluable definitions at the beginning of the sec- 
tions. Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1870. 

^ Prolegomena zur Theologie des Alten Testaments, 1845. 

4 Theologie des Alten Test., 2 Bde., 2te Aufl., 1883, 3te Aufl., 1891. 

5 His work has been translated into English in Clark's Library, Edin., 2 vols,, 
1874 ; also revised and edited by Prof. G. E. Day, N.Y., 1883. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 581 

as the highest point of Exegetical Theology, with a distinction 
of types combining in a higher unity, and with Neander intro- 
duce a new epoch in Biblical Theology. ^ 

On the other hand, F. Baur attempts to account for the 
peculiarities of the New Testament writings, as well as the 
origin of the Christian Church, by his theory of the two oppos- 
ing forces, the Judaistic and the Pauline, gradually uniting in 
the later writings of the New Testament in the second century 
into a more conservative and mediating theology, reaching its 
culmination in the Johannean writings, which are at an eleva- 
tion above the peculiarities of the earlier stages of development. 
Biblical Theology is to Baur a purely historical discipline. In 
it the scriptural doctrine loosens itself from the fetters of the 
dependent relation in which it has been to the dogmatic sys- 
tems of the Church, and will more and more emancipate itself 
therefrom. New Testament Theology is that part of Historical 
Theology which has to present the doctrine of Jesus as well as 
the doctrinal systems resting upon it, in the order and connec- 
tion of their historical development, according to the peculiar 
characteristics by which they are distinguished from one 
another, so far as this can be ascertained in the New Testa- 
ment writings. Baur strongly objects to the idea of Neander 
and his school, that there is a unit^ in the variety of New Tes- 
tament doctrines, which is the very opposite of his own view 
of a development out of contrasted and irreconcilable forces. 
Baur justly admits that the doctrines of Jesus must be at the 
foundation. The doctrine of Jesus must be drawn chiefly from 
the discourses in Matthew, yet these not in their present form, 
as given in our Greek Gospel, but in their original form, to be 
determined by sound criticism. The essential principle of 
Christianity and of the doctrine of Jesus is the ethical prin- 

1 The posthumous lectures of Professor Havernick, of Konigsberg, on Bibl. 
Theo. d. Alt. Test., were pubhshed by Hahn in 1848, and a revised edition by 
Hermann Schultz, in 1863, but are of no special value. Prof. H. Messner, 
of Berlin, in 1856, published Die Lehre der Apostel in the spirit of Neander. 
He begins with the system of James, Jude, and Peter ; makes the discourse of 
Stephen a transition to the Pauline system, and gives the theology of Paul with 
that of the Epistle to the Hebrews appended, and concludes with the theology 
of John and the Apocalypse. He finally gives a searching comparison of the 
various forms of apostolic doctrine, seeking a unity in the variety. 



582 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ciple ; the law is not only enlarged by the Gospel, but the 
Gospel is contrasted with it. They are related as the outer to 
the inner, the act to the intention, the letter to the spirit. 
'' Christianity presented in its original form in the doctrine of 
Jesus is a religion breathing the pu7'est moral spivit/'' "This 
moral element, as it is made known in the simple sentences of 
the sermon on the mount, is the purest and clearest content 
of the doctrine of Jesus, the real kernel of Christianity, to 
which all the rest, however significant, stands in a more or less 
secondary and accidental relation. It is that on which the 
rest must be built, for however little it has the form and colour 
of that Christianity which has become historical, yet it is in 
itself the entire Christianity."^ 

Neander and Baur, the great historical rivals of our century, 
thus attain the same end in John's contemplation which recon- 
ciles and harmonizes all the previous points of view. Accord- 
ing to Neander and his school, the variety therein attains a 
higher unity ; according to Baur and his school, the contra- 
dictory positions are reconciled in an ideal spirit which is 
indifferent to all mere externals. The lectures of Baur were 
published after his death in 1864.2 

Professor Reuss, of Strassburg, in 1852 issued his History of 
Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age.^ In the Preface to 
the last edition he states : 

'^The unity which has been sought at the end of the Avork, I 
have dwelt upon where the history itself points to it — namely, 
at the beginning. It is in the primitive Gospel, in the teaching of 
the Lord Himself, that we find the focus of those rays which the 
prism of analysis places before us, separately in their different 
shades of colour. As it has not been my design to produce a criti- 
cal or theoretical, but a historical work, I have necessarily followed 
the natural evolution of the ideas, nor did it come within my prov- 
ince to violate this order to subserve any practical purpose, how- 
ever lawful." 

1 Neu. Test. Theologie, pp. 64 seq. See p. 499. 

2 Vorlesungen uber Neutestamentliche Theologie. 

3 Histoire de la Theologie Chretienne au Steele Apostolique^ 2 tomes. A 
translation of the 3d edition into English was published by Hodder & Stoughton, 

London, in 2 vols., 1872. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 583 

It is the distinguishing merit of Reuss that he sets the 
Biblical Theology of the New Testament in the midst of the 
religious movements of the times. He begins with a discus- 
sion of Judaism, e.g. the theology of the Jews subsequent to 
the exile and in its various sects, then considers John the Bap- 
tist and the Forerunners. In the second part he treats of the 
Gospels, in the third part the Jewish-Christian Theology, in 
the fourth the Pauline, and in the fifth the theology of John. 
But the historical method absorbs and overwhelms the induc- 
tive, and he justly names his work a History of Christian 
Theology in Apostolic Times. Standing with the school of 
Baur in contending for the position of the discipline in His- 
torical Theology, he differs from it in his giving up the recon- 
ciliation of contrasts in John's Theology. In the same year, 
1852, Lutterbeck,! a Roman Catholic writer, goes even more 
thoroughly than Reuss into the doctrinal systems in the midst of 
which Christianity arose : (1) The Heathen systems ; (2) the 
Jewish ; (3) the mixed systems and heresies of the apos- 
tolic period. He then passes over to the Christian system, 
distinguishing the various types as did Neander, and shows 
their genesis and internal harmony in an able and thorough 
manner, distinguishing three stages of apostolic doctrine : 
(1) From the death of Christ to the Apostolic Council, the 
original type ; (2) the time of contrasted views, 50-70 ; 
(3) the period of mediation, or the later life of the apostle 
John, 70-100 A.D. 

G. L. Hahn^ reacts to the historical ground without dis- 
tinction of types. B. Weiss ^ has also been influenced by the 
conflict between the schools of Neander and Baur to take an 
intermediate position. He excludes the life of Jesus and the 
great events of apostolic history, and also restricts Biblical 
Theology to the variety of the types of doctrine and aban- 
dons the effort for a higher unity. Within the limits chosen 
by the author his work is elaborate and thorough, and a most 

1 NeutestamentUchen Lehrbegriffe, 2te Bde., 1852. 
■2 Theologie des Alten Testaments^ Vol L, 1854. 

^ Lehrh. d. Bibl. Theo. d. N. T., 1868, 3te Aufl., 1880. Translated into 
English in Clark's Library, Vol. L, 1883. 



584 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

valuable addition to the literature, but it does not show any 
progress in his conception of the discipline. 

Hermann Schultz, in 1869,^ laid stress upon the historico- 
critical method of the school of Baur. He includes religion 
as well as dogmatics and ethics in his scheme, excluding the 
apocryphal books and limiting himself to the canonical writ- 
ings. His work is elaborate and thorough in its working out 
of details, but does not show any real progress.'^ 

In his Biblical Theology, 1870, Van Oosterzee^ does not 
enter much into details or present a thorough-going compari- 
son, yet he seeks the higher unity as well as the individual 
types. He regards Biblical Theology as a part of Historical 
Theology, but his treatment of it is after the style of Neander. 
He does not estimate the life of Jesus and the religious life of 
the apostolic Church. He neglects the religious and ethical 
elements, and as a whole must be regarded as falling behind 
the later treatises on the subject. Bernard* issued a brief 
work in the spirit of Neander, but without any advance in 
the working out of the theme.. 

Ewald in 1871-1876 issued his massive and profound work.^ 
The first volume treats of the doctrine of the Word of God, 
the second of the doctrine of God, the third of the doctrines of 
the world and man, the fourth of the life of men and of the 
kingdom of God. These divisions of the subject-matter are 
simple and comprehensive, and the treatment, especially in the 
first volume, is admirable and profound ; and yet the historical 
side of the discipline falls too much into the background ; so 
that we must regard the work on the whole as a decline from 
the higher position of the schools of Neander and Baur. In- 

1 AUtestamentliche Theologie, 2te Aufl., 1878 ; 5te Aufl., 1896. 

2 In his last editions Schultz has gone over to the school of Wellhansen, and 
reconstructed his Biblical Theology so as to distinguish a Prophetic and Levitical 
period, and abandons the historical development, and thus like Ewald declines 
from the advanced position of F. Baur and Neander. 

3 Bibl. Theo. of the Neio Test. Translated from the Dutch by M. J. Evans. 
N.Y., 1876. 

* Progress of Doctrine in the Neiv Testament., Bampton Lectures, 1864, 2d ed., 
1867. 

^ Lehre der Bibel von G-ott oder Theologie des Alien und ISfeuen Bundes, 
4Bde. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 585 

deed, Old Testament Theology was not yet ripe for the treat- 
ment that was necessary to bring it up to the standard of the 
New Testament Theology. The older views of the biblical 
writings of the Old Testament, both of the Critical and Tradi- 
tional sides, were too mechanical and uncertain. There was 
needed a great overturning of the soil of the Old Testament 
by a radical critical study of its religion and history, such as 
Strauss had made in the New Testament. Such a treatment 
was prepared for by Vatke, Reuss, and Graf,^ but first carried 
out by Kuenen,2 and then by Julius Wellhausen.^ These dis- 
tinguished three great codes and sections in the Pentateuch, 
found two antagonistic elements in the Old Testament Script- 
ures, ventured upon a radical reconstruction of Old Testament 
religion and history, and established a large and enthusiastic 
school. 

Kuenen, in his history of Israel, finds in the period from 
Hezekiah to the exile two antagonistic parties in perpetual 
conflict. The one is the more popular and conservative party, 
advocating the ancient religion of the land, the local sanctuaries 
and image worship, together with various deities. This party 
was formed by the majority of the prophets and the older Le- 
vitical priests. The other party was the progressive and the 
reforming party, aiming at a central and exclusive sanctuary, 
and the worship of Yahweh alone in a more spiritual man- 
ner. This was the priestly party at Jerusalem, formed by the 
prophets Isaiah, Micah, and Jeremiah. These parties strug- 
gled with varying fortunes until the exile. The reforming 
party issued as their programme the Deuteronomic code. In- 
dependent of them, yet at times merging with the party of 
progress, was the tendency of Hebrew wisdom.* Tl^e struggle 
was thus "between Yahwism and Jewish nationality."^ Diir- 

1 Hitzig, in his posthumous Vorlesungen uber Bibl. Theo. und Mess. Weissa- 
gungen, 1880, treats first of the principle of the religion of the Old Testament, 
e.g. the idea of God as a holy spirit. This developed itself in two directions : 
Universalism and Particularism. The book is defective in method, arbitrary 
in judgment, and shows no real progress beyond this distinction of types. 

2 Beligion of Israel, 1869-1870 (in the Dutch language, translated 1873-1875 
into English) and by his Prophets and Proj^hecy in Israel, 1877. 

3 Gesch. Israel, Bd. L, 1878, 2te Ausg., 1883. 

'^ Beligion of Israel, II. Chap. 6. ° In I.e., I. p. 70. 



586 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

ing the exile, influenced by Ezekiel's programme of reconstruc- 
tion, the priestly legislation of the middle books of the Pen- 
tateuch was composed, and Ezra introduced it to the new- 
commonwealth at Jerusalem. 

"Ezra and Nehemiah assailed as much the independence of the 
religious life of the Israelites, which found utterance in prophecy, 
as the more tolerant judgment upon the heathen to which many 
inclined ; their reformation was in other words anti-prophetic and 
anti-universalistic. History teaches us that the Reformation of 
Ezra and jSTehemiah nearly coincides in date with the disappear- 
ance of Prophecy in Israel." ^ 

The three great codes were afterward combined in the Pen- 
tateuch. Thus this scheme of the reconstruction of the Old 
Testament legislation and religion, adopted by such a large 
number of critics, resembles in a most remarkable degree the 
reconstruction of the New Testament history and doctrine pro- 
posed by Baur; namely, two antagonistic and irreconcilable 
forces resulting in a final system above them both. 

The several codes and sections of the Pentateuch have now 
been recognized by all critical scholars. They correspond in a 
remarkable manner with the various presentations of the Gos- 
pel of Jesus. And so the great types such as we find in the 
Prophetic, Priestly, and Sapiential writings are clearly defined, 
corresponding closely with the Petrine, Pauline, and the Johan- 
nine types of the New Testament. The correspondence goes 
even farther, in that, as the Jewish-Christian type is divided in 
twain by the gospels of Mark and Matthew, and by the apos- 
tles Peter and James, so the prophetic type breaks up into 
the Psalmists and the Prophets. The three great types must 
be recognized in the Old Testament, extending through the his- 
torical, prophetical, and poetical books and other writings, as in 
the New Testament the types are recognized in the Gospels, the 
book of Acts, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse. The school of 
Kuenen and Wellhausen regard them as antagonistic like the 

III, pp. 240 seq. See the article, "The Critical Theories of Julius Well- 
hausen," by Prof. Henry P. Smith, in the Presbyterian Bevieio, 1882, pp. 357 
seq.; and my article, "Critical Study of the History of the Higher Criticism," 
in the same Beview, 1883, pp. 69 seq. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 58T 

parties in Church and State in our own day, the history and 
religion having a purely natural development. Christian schol- 
ars will, in the main, deal with the Old Testament as they 
have done with the New Testament under the lead of Neander, 
Schmid, and Oehler, and recognize the variation of type in 
order to a more complete and harmonious representation as 
they combine under the supernatural influence of a divine 
progressive revelation. 

Among more recent works may be mentioned : Piepenbring,^ 
of the school of Reuss. He arranges the theology of the Old 
Testament in periods. (1) Mosaism from the beginning to the 
eighth century B.C. (2) Prophetism until the close of the exile. 
(3) The priestl}^ period from the exile to the first century B.C. 

Riehm also, in his posthumous work,^ little influenced by the 
school of Reuss, arranged the theology of the Old Testament 
in periods. He distinguishes Mosaism, Prophetism, and Ju- 
daism. Dillmann, however, in his posthumous lectures ^ agrees 
with Ewald, and abandons the attempt to arrange the material 
in periods. After a historical introduction he discusses the 
subject under the topics : doctrine of God, doctrine of Man, 
and doctrine of the Kingdom of God. 

Smend,^ of the school of Reuss, treats the subject in the three 
periods : (1) the Religion of Israel ; (2) the Religion of the 
Prophets, beginning with Elijah, and (3) the Religion of the 
Older Judaism, beginning with the Reformation of Josiah. 
His volume is the richest of all in detailed investigation ; but 
his historical divisions are a decline from those of Piepenbring, 
and his arrangement of the material is confusing and unsatis- 
factory. By his title he shows that he unduly emphasizes the 
religious element over against Faith and Morals. 

C. H. Toy,^ on the other side, emphasizes the ethical element 

1 Theologie de VAncien Testament, 1887, trans, by H. G. Mitchell. 

2 AUtestamentliche TJieologie, bearbeitet nnd herausgegeben von K. Pahncke, 
1889. 

2 Handbiicli der Alttest. Theologie, herausgegeben von R. Kittel, 1895. 

^ Lehrbiich der Alttestamentlichen Religionsgescliichte, 1893. 

^ Judaism and Christianity, 1890. It is discreditable to German and British 
vsrriters that they so generally ignore a volume which is on the whole the best 
that has ever been written on its subject. 



588 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and gives the best statement of biblical ethics and sociology that 
has yet been produced. 

A considerable amount of special investigation in Old Testa- 
ment Theology has been made by many scholars — such as 
Orelli,^ Duff,2 Kahle,^ and Kirkpatrick.^ The archaeological 
sources of Old Testament Theology have been investigated by 
Baethgen,^ and especially by W. Robertson Smith. ^ 

Recent works on New Testament Theology have devoted 
themselves more to a study of the particular types with refer- 
ence to their psychological development out of the condition of 
mind and historical position and training of the various New 
Testament writers. Immer '^ restates the positions of the school 
of Baur, but with the important advance that he traces the 
various stages of the development of the Pauline theology 
itself with considerable industry and skill; so Pfleiderer,^ 
Sabatier,^ and especially Holsten,^^ who strives to derive the 
peculiarity of the doctrine of Paul out of his consciousness 
rather than from the vision and Christophany on the way to 
Damascus. ^1 Thoma^^ strives to explain the theology of John 

1 Die Alttestamentliche Weissagung von der Vollendung des Gottesreiches, 
1882. 

2 Old Testament Theology, or The History of Hebrew Religion from the 
Tear 800 B. C, 1891. 

3 Biblische Eschatologie, 1870. * Doctrine of the Prophets, 1892. 
^ Beitrdgezur Semitischen Beligionsgeschichte, 1888. 

6 Meligion of the Semites, 1894. ^ xheo. d. N. T, 1877. 

8 Influence of the Apostle Paul, 1885. It was natural that the theology of 
Paul should receive at first the closest examination. Usteri, Entwickelung des 
Paulinischen Lehrhegriffes, 1829, 6te Aufl., 1851, is a classic work ; followed hy 
Dahne, Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrhegriffes, 1835 ; Baur, Paulus der 
Apostel Jesu Christi, 1845, 2te Aufl., 1866 ; Opitz (H.), System des Paulus, 1874. 

9 L^Apotre Paul esquisse d''une Histoire de sa Pensee, 1870. Deuxi^me edi- 
tion revue et augment^e, 1881, Paris. He finds tbe origin of Paul's theology 
in the combination of the three facts — his Pharisaism which he left, the Chris- 
tian Church which he entered, and the conversion by w^hich he passed from the 
one to the other. He then traces the genesis of the Pauline theology in three 
periods. 

10 Zum Evangelium des Paulus u. d. Petrus, 1868 ; Evangelium des Paulus, 
1880. 

11 Prof. A. B. Bruce, of Glasgow, in his article on " Paul's Conversion and the 
Pauline Gospel," in the Pres. Beview, 1880, pp. 652 seq., ably discusses these 
theories, and shows the connection of Pauline theology with the supernatural 
event of the Christophany and the apostle's consequent conversion. 

1- Die Genesis des Johannes Evangelium, 1882. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 589 

as a development out of the struggling doctrinal conceptions 
of Judaism and Alexandrianism.^ 

Beyschlag^ gives first, the doctrine of Jesus (a) according 
to the synoptists, (5) according to the Gospel of John ; and 
then the doctrine of the Apostles : (^a) the original apostolic 
ideas of the Jerusalem community according to the book of 
Acts, of the Epistle of James, of the First Epistle of Peter, and 
of the Epistles of Paul ; (5) the later knd more advanced doc- 
trine of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Apocalypse and the 
Epistle of John, and the author of the fourth Gospel ; and 
finally (c) the pre-apostolic doctrine of the authors of the 
synoptic Gospels and book of Acts, the Epistle of Jude, and 
2 Peter, and the Pastorals. W. F. Adeney in 1894 issued a 
brief outline ^ very much after the same method, giving first the 
teaching of Jesus according to the synoptists, then the primi- 
tive type of the apostles, the Pauline type, the theology of the 
epistle to the Hebrews, and the Johannine type of the Apoca- 
lypse, Gospel, and Epistles. 

The most important works in the theology of the New Testa- 
ment in the present time are those of Wendt and H. J. Holtz- 
mann.* Wendt endeavours to distinguish the teaching of the 
Logia from the teaching of Jesus according to the synoptists, 
and also, in a measure, the teaching of the original Gospel 
of John from our present fourth Gospel. And he traces the 
relation between these various forms of the teaching of Jesus 
and the religious ideas of the Jews of the time as expressed 
in the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha.^ Holtzmann empha- 
sizes the religious ideas enveloping the teaching of Jesus and 
introductory to the apostolic doctrine, after the method of 
Reuss and Lutterbeck. Thus he puts the teaching of Jesus 

1 Other special writers upon particular types are : Riehm, Lehrhegriff des 
Hebraerbriefs, 1867 ; K, E. Kostlin, Lehrbegriff des Evang. und der Briefe 
Johannes, 1845 ; B. Weiss, PetriniscJie Lehrbegriff, 1855 ; Johanneische Lehr- 
begriff, 1862 ; Zschokke, Theologie der Propheten des Alten Testaments, 1877 ; 
W. Schmidt, Lehrgehalt des Jacobus Briefes, 1869 ; H. Gebhardt, Lehrbegriff 
der Apokalypse, 1873. 

2 Neutestamentliche Theologie, 2te Bde., 1891-1892. 
^ The Theology of the New Testament. 

* Lehrbuch der Neutestamentliche Theologie, 2te Bde. , 1897. 
5 Die Lehre Jesu, 2 Th., 1886-1890. 



690 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

as (2) in the midst of (1) the religious and moral world of 
thought of contemporary Judaism and (3) the theological prob- 
lems of primitive Christianity. He abandons the effort to dis- 
tinguish types of doctrine, and gives under Paul and apostolic 
literature (1) Paulinism, (2) Deuteropaulinism, and (3) the 
Johannine theology. However rich in material these volumes 
may be, in conception of the discipline and in method they are 
reactionary from the true ideals of Biblical Theology. In one 
respect Holtzmann is greatly to be commended. He regards 
the recent tendency to make the Kingdom of God the central 
or fundamental and determining element in the Teaching of 
Jesus as a mistake, and he rightly begins with the fundamental 
question of the attitude of Jesus to the law.^ He greatly ex- 
aggerates the mythical and legendary elements in the Gospels, 
and also the external religious ideas of the times in their forma- 
tive influence upon primitive Christianity. 

A large amount of special work has been done in the New 
Testament theology by Irons,^ Menegoz,^ Dickson,* Issel,^ 
Gloel,6 Everling,7 Bruce,8 Stevens,^ Du Bose,io Everett,ii 
Kabisch,^^ Schwartzkopff,^^ Bousset,^* and others too numerous 
to mention. The theology of the Jews in the time of our Lord 
has been investigated especially by Drummond^^ and Stan- 
ton.i6 

I may be permitted to mention my effort to trace the doc- 
trine of the Messiah with correlated conceptions in its historical 

1 L. c. s. , 130 seq. ^ Christianity as taught by St. Paul, 1876, 

3 La peche et la redemptioti d'apres St. Paul, 1882 ; La theologie de Vepitre 
aux Hebreux., 1894. 

* Saint PauVs Use of the Terms Flesh and Spirit, 1883. 

5 Der Begriffder Heiligkeit in N. 2'., 1887. 

^ Der Heilige Geist in der Heilsverkundigung des Paulus, 1888. 

■^ Die paulinische Angelologie U7id Ddmonologie, 1888. 

8 Kingdom of God, 1889 ; Saint PauVs Conception of Christianity., 1894. 

^ Pauline Theology, 1892 ; Johannine Theology, 1894. 
10 Soteriology of the New Testament, 1892. 
" Gospel of Paul, 1893. 

12 Eschatologie des Paulus, 1893. 

13 Die Weissagungen Jesu Christi, 1895. 

1* Der Antichrist in der TJeherlieferung des Judenthums des N. T. und der 
alten Kirche, 1895. 

15 The Jewish Messiah, 1877. 

16 The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, 1886. 



BIBLICAI. THEOLOGY 591 

development in the Old Testament, the Apocrypha and Pseude- 
pigrapha, and the New Testament. ^ 

Many younger men have been misled by the theories and 
speculations of Ritschl and Weiszacker to abandon the attempt 
to trace a development in the theology of Paul or of Jesus. ^ 
They have a theory of what the teaching of Jesus was, and of 
what the doctrine of Paul was at the beginning ; and they do 
not hesitate to exclude from the teaching of Jesus and Paul 
and assign to other and later writers what does not accord with 
these conceptions. This I can only regard as a reaction toward 
the mischievous tendencies of the school of Baur, which have 
been, to such a great extent, overcome. There is also a re- 
action in the same school toward an undue emphasis of the 
historical side of the discipline, especially to be seen in Stade,^ 
Deismann,* and Wrede,^ which results in doing away with the 
discipline of Biblical theology as the highest department of 
Biblical Study, and the substitution for it of a history of religion 
in the times of the Bible. 

Biblical Theology may be expected to make still further 
advances : (1) in the study of the relation of the various types 
to one another and to their unity ; (2) in the origin and devel- 
opment of the particular types ; (3) and more especially in 
the relation of the New Testament Theology to the Old Tes- 
tament Theology and to the theology of the Apocrypha and 
the Pseudepigrapha. 

We have thus far distinguished two stages in the develop- 
ment of the discipline of Biblical Theology. Gabler first 
stated its historical principle, and distinguished it from Sys- 
tematic Theology. Neander then distinguished its variety of 
types, and Schmid stated its exegetical principle, and distin- 

'^ Messianic Prophecy, 1886, Ttli ed., 1898; Messiah of the Gospels, 1894; 
Messiah of the Apostles, 1895. ^ See pp. 500 seq. 

2 Ueber die Aufgahen der hihlischen Theologie des N. T. in Zeitschrift f 
Theologie und Kirche, 1893, s. 31 seq. 

* Zwr Methode der bib. Theo. des X. T. in Zeitschrift f. Theologie und 
Kirche, 1893, s. 126 seq. 

° Ueber Aufgabe und Methode der sogenannten Neutestamentlichen Theologie, 
1897. 



592 STUDY or holy scripture 

guished it from Historical Theology as a part of Exegetical 
Theology. We are now in a third stage, in which Biblical 
Theology, as the point of contact of the biblical discipline with 
the other great sections of Theological Encyclopaedia, is shoAv- 
ing the true relation of its various types to one organic system 
of divine truth, and tracing them each and all to their divine 
origin and direction as distinguished from the ordinary types 
of human thinking. Biblical Theology will act as a conserv- 
ing and a reconciling force in the theology of the next century. 
Step by step Biblical Theology has advanced in the progress of 
exegetical studies. It is and must be an aggressive discipline. 
It has a fourfold work: of removing the rubbish that scholas- 
ticism has piled upon the Word of God ; of battling with 
rationalism for its principles, methods, and products ; of re- 
sisting the seductions of mysticism; and of building up an 
impregnable system of sacred truth. As the Jews returning 
from their exile built the walls of Jerusalem, working with 
one hand, and with the other grasping a weapon, so must bib- 
lical scholars build up the system of Biblical Theology, until 
they have erected a structure of biblical truth containing the 
unity in the variety of divine revelation, a structure compacted 
through the fitting together of all the solid stones of sacred 
truth according to the adaptation of a divine pre-arrangement. 

IV. The Idea of Biblical Theology 

Having considered the origin and history of Biblical The- 
ology, we are now prepared to show its position and impor- 
tance, and define it as to its idea, method, and system. 

1. Biblical Theology is that theological discipline which pre- 
sents the theology of the Bible in its historical formation 
within the canonical writings. The discipline limits itself 
strictly to the theology of the Bible, and thus excludes from 
its range the theology of the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphi- 
cal writings of the Jewish and Christian sects, the ideas of 
the various external religious parties, and the religions of the 
world brought in contact with the people of God at different 
periods in their history. It is true that these must come into 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 593 

consideration for comparative purposes, in order to show their 
influence positively and negatively upon the development of 
biblical doctrine; for the biblical religion is a religion in the 
midst of a great variety of religions of the world, and its dis- 
tinctive features can be shown only after the elimination of the 
features that are common with other religions. We must show 
from the historical circumstances, the psychological prepara- 
tions, and all the conditioning influences, how far the origin 
and development of the particular type and the particular 
stage of religious development of Israel and the Church were 
influenced by these external forces. We must find the super- 
natural influence that originated and maintained the biblical 
types and the biblical religion as distinct and separate from all 
other religions. And then these other religious forces will not 
be employed as coordinate factors with biblical material, as is 
done by Reuss, Schwegler, and Kuenen, and later writers of 
the school of Ritschl, who make Biblical Theology simply a 
history of religion, or of doctrine in the times of the Bible 
and in the Jewish nation. Rather these theological concep- 
tions of other religions will be seen to be subordinate factors 
as influencing Biblical Theology from without, and not from 
within, as presenting the external occasions and conditions of 
its growth, and not its normal and regulative principles. 

Thus Stade urges that Old Testament Theology is a his- 
torical discipline and that it cannot be limited to the Canon of 
the Old Testament. He insists that there should be a return to 
the sound principles of De Wette and Von Coln.^ Deissmann 
also thinks that the theology of the New Testament should not 
be limited to the Canon ; but that its purpose is to give the 
theology of primitive Christianity rather than the theology of 
the New Testament writings. He represents that it has three 
chief problems : (1) to present the religious and moral con- 
tents of the thought of the age in which Christianity origi- 
nated ; (2) to give the special formations of the primitive 
Christian consciousness ; (3) the comprehensive character of 
the whole. Under the second head he would give : (a) the 

1 Zeitschrift f. Theologie und Kirche, 1893, s. 48. " Sie hat sich an dem 
A. T. als Institution nnd nicht an dem A. T. as Canon zu orientieren," s. 46. 
2q 



594 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

synoptic preaching of Jesus ; (6) the Pauline Christianity ; 
(<?) the Johannine Christianity. ^ The climax is reached in 
Wrede, who proposes to do away with the term " Biblical The- 
ology " and substitute for it the term " History of the Primitive 
Christian Religion." ^ 

There is doubtless room for a special discipline devoting its 
attention to the history of the primitive Christian religion, and 
using other sources than the Biblical sources, the Canon of 
Holy Scripture. But such a discipline can never take the 
place of Biblical Theology, which is entitled to the name Bib- 
lical only so far as it uses the Biblical writings as not only 
normal to the discipline, but also as defining its scope. The 
biblical limit must be maintained; for the biblical material 
stands apart by itself, in that the theology therein contained 
is the theology of a divine revelation, and thus distinguished 
from all other theologies, both as to its origin and its develop- 
ment. They give us either the products of natural religion 
in various normal and abnormal systems, originating and de- 
veloping under the influence of unguided or partially guided 
human religious strivings, or else are apostasies or deflections 
from the religion of revelation in its various stages of develop- 
ment, or else, at the best, represent the genuine strivings of 
Christianity apart from and beyond the biblical guides. 

2. The discipline we have defined as presenting the theology 
of the Bible. It is true that the term " Biblical Theology " 
is ambiguous as being too broad, having been employed as a 
general term including Biblical Introduction, Hermeneutics, 
and so on. And yet we must have a broad term, for we can- 
not limit our discipline to Dogmatics. Biblical Dogmatics, as 
rightly conceived, is a part of Systematic Theology, being a 
priori and deductive in method. Biblical Dogmatics deduces 
the dogmas from the biblical material and arranges them in an 
a priori dogmatic system, presenting not so much the doctrines 
of the Bible in their simplicity and in their concrete form as 
they are given in the Scriptures themselves, but such doctrines 
as may be fairly derived from the biblical material by the logi- 

1 Zeitschrift f. Theologie und Kirche, 1893, s. 126 seq. 

2 TJeher Aufg. zmd Methode der sogenannten N. T. Theologie, 1897, s. 80. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 595 

cal process, or can be gained by setting the Bible in the midst 
of philosophy and Church tradition. We cannot deny to this 
department the propriety of using the name " Biblical Dog- 
matics." For where a dogmatic system derives its chief or 
only material from the Scriptures, there is force in its claim 
to be Biblical Theology. We do not, therefore, use the term 
" Biblical Theology " as applied to our discipline with the im- 
plication that a dogmatic system derived from the Bible is non- 
biblical or not sufficiently biblical, but as a term which has 
come to be applied to the discipline which we are now distin- 
guishing from Biblical Dogmatics. Biblical Theology, in the 
sense of our discipline, and as distinguished from Biblical Dog- 
matics, cannot take a step beyond the Bible itself, or, indeed, 
beyond the particular writing or author under consideration at 
the time. Biblical Theology has to do only with the sacred 
author's conceptions, and has nothing whatever to do with the 
legitimate logical consequences of these conceptions. It is not 
to be assumed that either the author or his generation argued 
out the consequences of their statements, still less discerned 
them by intuition ; although, on the other hand, we must 
always recognize that the religion and, indeed, the entire 
theology of a period or an author may be far wider and more 
comprehensive than the record or records that have been left 
of it ; and that, in all cases, Biblical Theology will give us 
the minimum rather than the maximum of the theology of a 
period or author. But, on the other hand, we must also esti- 
mate the fact that this minimum is the inspired authority to 
which alone we can appeal. The only consequences with 
which Biblical Theology has to do are those historical ones 
that later biblical writers gained in their advanced knowledge 
of divine revelation, those conclusions that are true histori- 
cally — whatever our subjective conclusions may be as to the 
legitimate logical results of their statements. And even here 
the interpretation and use of later writers are not to be assigned 
to the authors themselves or the theology of their times. The 
term " Biblical Dogmatics " should be applied to that part of 
Dogmatics which rests upon the Bible and derives its material 
from the Bible by the legitimate use of its principles. Dog- 



596 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

matics as a theological discipline is far wider than the biblical 
material that is employed by the dogmatician. The biblical 
material should be the normal and regulative material, but the 
dogmatician will make use of the deductions from the Bible 
and from other authorities that the Church has made in the his- 
tory of doctrine, and incorporated in her creeds, or preserved 
in the doctrinal treatises of the theologians. He will also make 
use of right reason, and of philosophy, and science, and the re- 
ligious consciousness as manifest in the history of the Church 
and in the Christian life of the day. It is all-important that 
the various sources should be carefully discriminated, and the 
biblical material set apart by itself in Biblical Dogmatics, lest, 
in the commingling of material, that should be regarded as 
biblical which is non-biblical, or extra-biblical, or contra-bibli- 
cal, as has so often happened in the working of ecclesiastical 
tradition. And, even then, when Biblical Dogmatics has been 
distinguished in Systematic Theology, it should be held apart 
from Biblical Theology; for Biblical Dogmatics is the point 
of contact of Systematic Theology with Exegetical Theology ; 
and Biblical Theology is the point of contact of Exegetical 
Theology with Systematic Theology, each belonging to its own 
distinctive branch of theology, with its characteristic methods 
and principles. That system of theology which would anx- 
iously confine itself to supposed biblical material, to the neg- 
lect of the material presented by philosophy, science, literature, 
art, comparative religion, the history of doctrine, the symbols, 
the liturgies, and the life of the Church, and the pious religious 
consciousness of the individual or of Christian society, must be 
extremely defective and unscientific, and cannot make up for 
its defects by an appeal to the Scriptures and a claim to be 
biblical. None of the great systematic theologians, from the 
most ancient times, have ever proposed any such course. It 
has been the resort of the feebler Pietists in Germany, and of 
the narrower Evangelicalism of Great Britain and America, 
doomed to defeat and destruction, for working in such con- 
tracted lines. The errors involved in this exclusive depend- 
ence on biblical material have now been made so evident that 
none can reasonably dispute them. It is now perfectly clear 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 597 

that the New Testament is predominantly Pauline, and we 
must recognize a large and strong tradition, based on the 
teaching of Jesus and of the Twelve, which has no adequate 
representation in the New Testament proportionate to the 
teaching of Saint Paul. Only in this way can the Christianity 
of the second century be historically explained. ^ 

Biblical Theology cannot be a substitute for Systematic 
Theology. Systematic Theology is more comprehensive than 
Biblical Theology. Biblical Theology is important in order to 
the distinction that should be made, in the first place, between 
the biblical sources and all other sources of theology, and then, 
in the second place, to distinguish between Biblical Theology 
as presented in the Holy Scriptures themselves, and Biblical 
Dogmatics which makes deductions and applications of the 
biblical material. 

3. But Biblical Theology is wider than the doctrines of the 
Bible. It includes Ethics also. It is somewhat remarkable, 
however, that no one has thus far attempted to publish a Bibli- 
cal Ethics, and that the ethical element has little, if any, con- 
sideration in the most of the Biblical Theologies which have 
thus far been published. So far as it appears it is interwoven 
with the doctrines of faith, and has no separate existence, and 
no consideration is given to the ethical point of view. The 
only way in which the Ethics of the Bible can be given proper 
recognition is in the recognition of it as a separate department, 
just as it is recognized in the discipline of Dogmatics. Not 
until this has been done and the ethics of Holy Scripture has 
been thoroughly considered in its historical development and 
in its unity and variety, will the question of the relation of 
the Gospel to the Law, and of the New Testament to the Old 
Testament, be satisfactorily answered. It is at the bottom an 
ethical question rather than a question of faith. 

4. The school of Baur, and even Weiss and Van Oosterzee, 
would stop with biblical doctrines of faith and Biblical Ethics. 
But Schmid, Schultz, and Oehler are correct in taking Biblical 
Theology to include religion as well as doctrines and morals ; 

1 See p. 503. 



598 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

that is, those historic persons, facts, and relations which embody 
religious, dogmatical, and ethical ideas. This discrimination 
is important in Systematic Theology, but it is indispensable in 
Biblical Theology where everything is still in the concrete. 
Thus a fundamental question in the theology of the New 
Testament is, what to do with the life of Jesus. The life of 
Jesus is, as Schmid shows, the fruitful source of His doctrine, 
and a theology which does not estimate it lacks foundation and 
vital power. The life of Jesus may indeed be regarded from 
two distinct points of view, as a biographical, or as a doctrinal 
and religious, subject. The birth of Jesus may be regarded as 
a pure historical fact or as an incarnation. His suffering and 
death may be historical subjects, or as teaching the doctrine of 
the atonement. His life may afford biographical matter, or be 
considered as religious, doctrinal, and ethical, in that His life 
was a new religious force, a redemptive influence, and an ethi- 
cal example. Biblical Theology will have to consider, there- 
fore, what the life of Jesus presents for its various departments. 
And so the great fact of Pentecost, the Christophanies to Peter, 
Paul, and John, and the apostolic council at Jerusalem must all 
be brought into consideration. And in the Old Testament we 
have to consider the various covenants and the religious insti- 
tutions and laws that were grouped about them. Without 
religion, with its persons, events, and institutions. Biblical 
Theology would lose its foundations, and without ethical re- 
sults it would fail of its rich fruitage. It is therefore a whole- 
some movement of the more recent Ritschlians to emphasize 
the religious and vital element in early Christianity. It can 
become unwholesome only so far as they unduly magnify this 
element over against the other equally important elements. 

5. The discipline of Biblical Theology presents the theology 
of the Bible in its historical formation. This does not imply 
that it limits itself to the consideration of the various particu- 
lar conceptions of the various authors, writings, and periods, 
as Weiss, and even Oehler, maintain, but that, with Schmid, 
Messner, Van Oosterzee after Neander, it seeks the unity in 
the variety, ascertains the roots of the divergencies, traces them 
each in their separate historical development, shows them co- 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 599 

operating in the formation of one organic system. For Bib- 
lical Theology would not present a mere conglomerate of 
heterogeneous material in a bundle of miscellaneous Hebrew 
literature, but would ascertain whether there is not some prin- 
ciple of organization ; and it finds that principle in a super- 
natural divine revelation and communication of redemption in 
the successive covenants of grace, extending through many 
centuries, operating through many minds, and in a great vari- 
ety of literary styles, employing all the faculties of man and all 
the types of human nature, in order to the accomplishment 
of one massive, all-embracing, and everlasting Divine Word^ 
adapted to every age, every nation, every type of character, 
every temperament of mankind; the whole world. 

y. The Place of Biblical Theology 

Biblical Theology belongs to the department of the Study of 
Holy Scripture as a higher exegesis, completing the exegetical 
process, and presenting the essential material and principles of 
the other departments of theology. 

The boundaries between Exegetical and Historical Theology 
are not so sharply defined as those between either of them and 
Dogmatic Theology. All Historical Theology has to deal with 
sources, and in this respect must consider them in their variety 
and unity as well as their development ; and hence many theo- 
logians combine Exegetical Theology and Historical Theology 
under one head — Historical Theology. It is important, how- 
ever, to draw the distinction, for this reason. The sources of 
Biblical Theology are in different relation from the sources 
of a history of doctrine, inasmuch as they constitute a body of 
divine revelation, and are in this respect to be kept distinct 
from all other sources, even cotemporary and of the same 
nation. They have an absolute authority which no other 
sources can have. The stress is to be laid less upon their his- 
torical development than upon them as an organic body of 
revelation ; and this stress upon their importance as sources, 
not only for historical development, but also for dogmatic 
reconstruction and practical application, requires that the spe- 



600 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

cial study of them should be exalted to a separate discipline 
and a distinct branch of theology. 

In the biblical discipline, Biblical Theology occupies the 
highest place, is the latest and crowning achievement. It is a 
higher exegesis, completing the exegetical process. All other 
branches of the study of Holy Scripture are presupposed by 
it. Biblical Literature must first be studied as sacred litera- 
ture. All questions of date of writing, integrity, construction, 
style, and authorship must be determined by the principles of 
the Higher Criticism. Biblical Canonics determines the extent 
and authority of the various writings that are to be regarded 
as composing the sacred Canon, and discriminates them from 
all other writings by the criticism of the believing spirit enlight- 
ened and guided by the Holy Spirit in the Church. Biblical 
Textual Criticism ascertains the true text of the writings in 
the study of manuscripts, versions, and citations, and seeks to 
present it in its pure primitive forms. Biblical Hermeneutics 
lays down the rules of Biblical Interpretation, and Biblical 
Exegesis applies these rules to the various particular passages 
of the Sacred Scriptures. Biblical Theology accepts all these 
rules and applications. It is not its office to go into the 
detailed examination of the verse and the section, but it must 
accept the results of a thorough exegesis and criticism in order 
to advance thereon and thereby to its own proper work of 
higher exegesis ; namely, rising from the comparison of verse 
with verse, and paragraph with paragraph, where simple exe- 
gesis is employed, to the still more difficult and instructive 
comparison of writing with writing, author with author, period 
with period, until by generalization and synthesis the theology 
of the Bible is attained as an organic whole. 

Biblical Theology is thus the culmination of Exegetical The- 
ology, and must be in an important relation to all other branches 
of theology. For Historical Theology it presents the great 
principles of the various periods of history, the fundamental 
and controlling tendencies, which, springing from human nature 
and operating in all the religions of the world, find their proper 
expression and satisfaction in the normal development of Divine 
Revelation, but which, breaking loose from these salutary bonds. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 601 

become perverted and distorted into abnormal forms, producing 
false and heretical principles and radical errors. And so in 
the biblical unity of these tendencies Biblical Theology pre- 
sents the ideal unity for the Church and the Christian in all 
times of the world's history. For Dogmatic Theology, Biblical 
Theology affords the holy material to be used in Biblical Apolo- 
getics, Dogmatics, and Ethics, the fundamental and controlling 
material out of which that systematic structure must be built 
which will express the intellectual and moral needs of the par- 
ticular age, fortify the Church for offence and defence in the 
struggles with the anti-Christian world, and give unity to its 
life, its efforts, and its dogmas in all ages. For Practical The- 
ology it presents the various types of religious experience and 
of doctrinal and ethical ideas, which must be skilfully applied 
to the corresponding differences of type which exist in all 
times, in all churches, in all lands, and, indeed, in all religions 
and races of mankind. Biblical Theology is, indeed, the Irenic 
force which will do much to harmonize the antagonistic forces 
and various departments of theology, and bring about that 
toleration within the Church which is the greatest requisite of 
our times. 

VI. Method of Biblical Theology 

The method employed by Biblical Theology is a blending of 
the genetic and the inductive methods. The method of Bibli- 
cal Theology arises out of the nature of the discipline and its 
place in Theological Encyclopsedia. As it must show the theol- 
ogy of the Bible in its historic formation, ascertain its genesis, 
the laws of its development from germinal principles, the order 
of its progress in every individual writer, and from writer to 
writer and age to age in the successive periods and in the 
whole Bible, it must employ the genetic method. It is this 
genesis which is becoming more and more important in our 
discipline, and is indeed the chief point of discussion in oui 
day. Can all be explained by a natural genesis, or must an 
extraordinary divine influence be called in ? The various ra- 
tionalistic efforts to explain the genesis of the biblical types of 
doctrine in their variety and their combination in a unity in the 



602 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Scriptures are extremely unsatisfactory and unscientific. With 
all the resemblances to other religions, the Biblical Religion is 
so different that its differences must be explained, and these 
can only be explained by the claims of the sacred writers them- 
selves, that God Himself in various forms of Theophany and 
Christophany revealed Himself to initiate and to guide the 
religion of the Bible in its various movements and stages. 
Mosaism centres about the great Theophany of Horeb, as 
Christianity centres about the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It 
is the problem of Biblical Theology, as it has traced the The- 
ology of the Jewish Christian type to the Theophany of Pente- 
cost, and of the Pauline type to the Christophany on the way 
to Damascus, so to trace the Johannine type and the various 
Old Testament types to corresponding supernatural initia- 
tion. The Johannine type may be traced to the Christopha- 
nies of Patmos. The Old Testament is full of Theophanies 
which originate particular Covenants and initiate all the great 
movements in the history of Israel. ^ 

As it has to exhibit the unity in the variety of the various 
conceptions and statements of the writings and authors of 
every different type, style, and character, and by comparison 
generalize to its results. Biblical Theology must employ the 
inductive method and the synthetical process. This inductive 
method is the true method of Exegetical Theology. The 
details of exegesis have been greatly enriched by this method 
during tlie present century, especially by the labours of German 
divines, and in most recent times by numerous labourers in 
Great Britain and America. But the majority of the labourers 
in Biblical Theology have devoted their strength to the work- 
ing out of the historical principle of our discipline. Within 
the various types and special doctrines a large amount of higher 
exegesis has been accomplished in recent years. The highest 
exegesis in the comparison of types and their arrangement in 
an organic system, with a unity and determining principle out 
of which all originate and to which they return their fruitage, 
remains comparatively undeveloped. Indeed the study of the 

1 See pp. 542 seq. 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 603 

particular types, especially in the Old Testament, must be con- 
ducted still further and to more substantial results ere the 
highest exegesis can fulfil its task. 

The genetic and the inductive methods must combine in 
order to the best results. They must cooperate in the treat- 
ment of every writing, of every author, of every period, and of 
the whole. They must blend in harmony throughout. On 
their proper combination the excellence of a system of Biblical 
Theology depends. An undue emphasis of either will make 
the system defective and inharmonious. 

VII. The System of Biblical Theology 

This is determined partly by the material itself, but chiefly 
by the methods of dealing with it. We must make the divi- 
sions so simple that they may be adapted to the most elemen- 
tary conceptions, and yet comprehensive enough to embrace 
the most fully developed conceptions ; and also so as to be 
capable of a simple and natural subdivision in the advancing 
periods. In order to this we must find the dominant principle 
of the entire revelation and make our historical and our induc- 
tive divisions in accordance with it. The divine revelation 
itself might seem to be this determining factor, so that we 
should divide historically by the historical development of that 
revelation, and synthetically by its most characteristic features. 
But this divine revelation was made to intelligent man and 
involved thereby an active appropriation of it on his part, both 
as to its form and substance, so that from this point of view 
we might divide historically in accordance with the great 
epochs of the appropriation of divine revelation, and syntheti- 
cally by the characteristic features of that appropriation. From 
either of these points of view, however, there might be — there 
naturally would be, an undue emphasis of the one over against 
the other at the expense of a complete and harmonious repre- 
sentation. We need some principle that will enable us to 
combine the subject and the object — God and man — in the 
unity of its conception. Such a principle is happily afforded 
us in the revelation itself, so distinctly brought out that it has 



604 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

been historically recognized in the names given to the two 
great sections of the Scriptures, the Old and the New Testa- 
ments or Covenants. The Covenant is the fundamental prin- 
ciple of the divine revelation, to which the divine revelation 
commits its treasures and from which man continually draws 
upon them. The Covenant has a great variety of forms in 
the Sacred Scriptures; but the most essential and compre- 
hensive form is that assumed in the Mosaic Covenant at Sinai, 
which becomes the Old Covenant, preeminently, and over 
against that is placed the New Covenant of the Messiah Jesus 
Christ : so that the great historical division becomes the 
Theology of the Old Covenant and the Theology of the New 
Covenant. 

The Covenant must also determine the synthetic divisions. 
The Covenant is a union and communion effected between 
God and man. It involves a personal relationship which it 
originates and maintains by certain events and institutions. 
This is religion. The Covenant and its relations, man appre- 
hends as an intelligent being by meditation, reflection, and 
reasoning. All this he comprehends in doctrines, which he 
apprehends and believes and maintains as his faith. These 
doctrines will embrace the three general topics of God, of Man, 
and of Redemption. The Covenant still further has to do 
with man as a moral being, imposing moral obligations upon 
him with reference to God and man and the creatures of God. 
All these are comprehended under the general term "Ethics." 
These distinctions apply equally well to all the periods of 
divine revelation ; they are simple, they are comprehensive, 
they are all-pervading. Indeed they interpenetrate one 
another, so that many prefer to combine the three under the 
one term " Theology," and then treat of God and man and the 
union of God and man in redemption, in each division by itself 
with reference to religious, ethical, and doctrinal questions ; 
but it is easier and more thorough-going to keep them apart, 
even at the expense of looking at the same thing at times 
successively from three different points of view. 

From these more general divisions we may advance to such 
subdivisions as may be justified in the successive periods of 



BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 605 

Biblical Theology, both on the historic and synthetic sides, 
and, indeed, without anticipation. 

The relation between the historical and the synthetic divi- 
sions may be variously viewed. Thus Ewald, Dillmann, and 
Schultz make the historical divisions so entirely subordinate as 
to treat each topic of theology by itself in its history. 

This method has great advantages in the class-room. It is 
difficult to keep the attention of students to the development 
of the whole field of Biblical Theology. The lines are too 
extended. It is easier to show the development by taking a 
large number of topics, one after another, and tracing each 
one in its order in its historical development. ^ The historical 
divisions may be made so prominent that the synthetic will be 
subordinated to them. This leads towards making Biblical 
Theology a history of the development of theology in the 
Bible. 

The ideal method for a written Biblical Theology is not to 
sacrifice the interest of the whole for any or all particular sec- 
tions. They should be adjusted to one another in their his- 
torical development in the particular period. The periods 
should be so large and distinct as to leave no reason to doubt 
their propriety. 

It will be necessary to determine in each period : (1) the 
development of each particular doctrine by itself, as it starts 
from the general principle, and then (2) to sum up the general 
results before passing over into another period. 

It will also be found that theology does not unfold in one 
single line, but in several, from several different points of view, 
and in accordance with several different types. It will there- 
fore be necessary, on the one side, ever to keep these types 
distinct, and yet to show their unity as one organism. Thus 
in the Hexateuch the great types of the Ephraimitic, Judaic, 



1 There are undoubtedly grave perils connected with this method. I think 
these are greatly exaggerated by Wrede (Aufgabe und Methode der sogenannten 
Neutestamentlichen Theologie, 1897, s. 17 seq.), but I nevertheless think that 
he has rendered a real service by pointing them out. On the other hand he 
seems to be blind to the even greater perils which beset the exaggerated use of 
the historic method. 



606 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Deuteronomic, and priestly narrators will be distinctly traced 
until they combine in the one organism of our Hexateuch, 
presenting the fundamental Law of Israel. In the histori- 
cal books the same four types of historians will be distin- 
guished and compared for a higher unity. The four great 
types — the psalmists, wise men, the prophets, and the scribes 
— will be discriminated, the variations within the types care- 
fully studied and compared, and then the types themselves 
brought into harmony ; and at last the whole Old Testament 
will be presented as an organic whole. The New Testament 
will then be considered in the forerunners of Christ ; then the 
four types in which the evangelists present the Theology of 
Jesus, each by itself, in comparison with the others, and as a 
whole. The Apostolic Theology will be traced from its origin 
at Pentecost in its subsequent division into the great types, 
the conservative Jewish Christian of Saint James and the ad- 
vanced Jewish Christian of Saint Peter ; the Gentile Christian 
of Saint Paul and the Hellenistic of the Epistle to the Hebrews ; 
and, finally, the Johannine of the Gospel, Epistles, and Apoca- 
lypse of John ; and the whole will be considered in the unity 
of the New Testament. ^ As the last thing the whole Bible 
will be considered, showing not only the unity of the Theology 
of Christ and His apostles, but also the unity of the Theology 
of Moses and David and all the prophets with the Theology of 
Jesus and His apostles, as each distinct theology takes its place 
in the advancing system of divine revelation, all conspiring to 
the completion of a perfect, harmonious, symmetrical organism, 
the infallible expression of God's will, character, and being to 
His favoured children. At the same time the religion of each 
period and of the whole Bible will be set in the midst of the 
other religions of the world, so that it will appear as the divine 
grace ever working in humanity, and its sacred records as the 
true lamp of the world, holding forth the light of life to all the 
nations of the world. 



1 I have carefully considered the arguments of the Ritschlians ; but they have 
not convinced me that Saint Paul is so dominant of the New Testament as they 
suppose, or that they are correct in their interpretation of Saint Paul, or that 
there is so great an antithesis as they find between Saint Paul and the Twelve. 



CHAPTER XXIV 

THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

All of our studies of the Bible, thus far, have led us to the 
threshold of the inquiry how far Holy Scripture is credible and 
of divine authority. The deeper study of Holy Scripture in 
our day has made this a question of far greater seriousness than 
it has been in any previous generation of Jews or Christians. 
The prevalent dogmatic theories of the inspiration and infalli- 
bility of the Bible have been undermined in the entire range of 
Biblical Study, and it is a question in many minds whether 
they can ever be so reconstructed as to give satisfaction to 
Christian scholars. It is evident that such a reconstruction is 
most necessary ; but men are reluctant to undertake it, for it 
has cost severe struggles in the past and it is altogether proba- 
ble that still severer contests are in store for the men of this 
generation who have the insight, ability, and courage to do so 
great a work. 

The history of the Christian Church shows that it is the 
intrinsic excellence of the Holy Scriptures which has given 
them the control of so large a portion of our race. With few 
exceptions, the Christian religion was not extended by force 
of arms or by the arts of statesmanship, but by the holy lives 
and faithful teaching of self-sacrificing men and women who 
had firm faith in the truthfulness of their Holy Scriptures, and 
who were able to convince men in all parts of the world that 
they are faithful guides to God and salvation. A valid argu- 
ment for the truthfulness of the Holy Scriptures might be 
made from their efficacy in the religious training of so large a 
portion of mankind, and from the consecrated lives and the 
supreme devotion to their religion of the heroes of the faith in 
all ages. 

607 



608 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

But such an argument would only authenticate the substance 
of Holy Scripture ; it would not verify the dogmas about the 
Bible that are under fire, no more would it disprove them. 
But it ought to give encouragement to simple-minded Christians 
who are incapable of taking part in theological controversy. 

I. The Bible aind Other Sacred Books 

All the great historical religions of the world have sacred 
books which are regarded by their adherents as the inspired 
word of God. Preeminent among these sacred books are the 
Holy Scriptures of the Christian Church ; for these are now 
the religious guides of Europe and America, Australia and the 
islands of the Pacific, and they are ever increasing their adher- 
ents in Asia and Africa. 

If the Holy Scriptures are classed with these other sacred 
books provisionally, it is in order that we may define the feat- 
ures that are common to those books and so distinguish the 
features that are peculiar to each of them. 

If the distinctive features of the Old and New Testaments 
are those of God, and the distinctive features of all the other 
sacred books are those of man, the comparative study will make 
it so evident that every one in the world Avill eventually see it. 
That Christian who fears to put his Bible to such a test lacks 
confidence in it. The Old Testament prophets and the New 
Testament apostles never hesitated to challenge all other reli- 
gions to such a test. If Christians would conquer the world, 
here is an opportunity such as has never before been given in 
the history of the world. But this comparison must be scien- 
tific, entirely fair, reasonable, and honourable in order to be 
effective. Several faults are commonly committed by Christian 
apologists in such comparisons. 

1. A great error is committed by some missionaries and 
apologists in laying stress upon the errors in science, history, 
philosophy, and geology, and the grotesque imagery found in 
the sacred books of the East. The same argument may be 
brought to bear on the Holy Scriptures. It has been brought 
by many in our time. It is said that Biblical Criticism, in 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 609 

pointing out errors in the Bible, is doing its best to destroy the 
Bible, because it is pursuing the same method that our mis- 
sionaries are pursuing in the East in order to show that sacred 
books so full of errors as they are cannot be inspired. The 
argument is invalid on both sides. There are errors in cita- 
tions, in geography, in science, and in other matters also, in the 
sacred books of the East ; but there are also errors in the Holy 
Scriptures, as all scholars know. Does this destroy the Bible 
as a divine revelation ? Some say so. Some say that " a proved 
error in Scripture contradicts not only our doctrine, but also 
the Scripture's claims, and, therefore, its inspiration in making 
these claims." ^ But these errors are only in the form and cir- 
cumstantials, and not in the essentials. They do not impair 
any doctrine or principle of morals or religion. Many of the 
advocates of the religions of the East are now meeting Chris- 
tian apologists face to face, and saying: " As there are errors in 
our sacred books, so there are in your Bible also." The man 
who makes an attack can easily find ten errors to one seen by a 
friendly critic. The Moslem has as good a right as the Chris- 
tian to say that a sacred book which contains errors cannot be 
inspired. There are, doubtless, more errors in the sacred books 
of the East than in the Holy Scriptures. Errors abound in 
them, in comparison with which the errors in the Holy Script- 
ures are inconsiderable. Yet it is a false argument to claim 
that there is nothing reliable in these books on that account. 

We should be entirely candid in all our relations with men of 
other religions ; we should recognize all that is true, noble, and 
highest in their sacred books ; we should tell the adherents of 
these religions to strive to reach the highest ideals of their own 
religions, and then they will approach nearest to Christianity ; 
then they will be the best subjects for the grace of God. 

2. Another fault often committed against the sacred books 
of the East is in undue emphasis on their imperfect morality. 
It is astonishing how many Christian writers have been depre- 
ciating the sacred books of the other religions of the world. 
They seem altogether unconscious of the fact that the same 

1 See Briggs, W7iither, pp. 68 seq., where this statement of A. A. Hodge and 
B. B. Warfield is disproved. See also pp. 615 seq. 
2r 



610 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

method may be pursued with the Holy Scriptures. There are 
many who have pointed to the mistakes of Moses, and to the 
gross immoralities and barbarities of the book of Judges. How 
can a divine religion countenance such barbarities as these ? 
These arguments may be used against the Bible with terrific 
force. We commonly say that these things represent a lower 
stage of divine revelation, coming to men as they could bear it, 
educating them, little by little, to prepare them for the higher 
religion of Jesus Christ. The lower stage cannot be expected 
to compare with the higher stages. But we must treat the 
other religions of the world in the way in which we are obliged 
to treat the Old Testament. We must recognize that they 
belong to earlier stages of human development, that they have 
sprung up, not in Christian countries, but far away from the 
light of Christianity. It was the teaching of the earlier Church 
and of many of the Christian Fathers, that Creek religion and 
philosophy were used by the Divine Spirit in preparation for 
Christianity, to a less degree, but no less certainly, than the 
Jewish religion itself ; and that Plato and Socrates were pre- 
paring the way by which Christianity might achieve great vic- 
tories over the ancient world. ^ If we recognize this as true 
with reference to the religion and philosophy of Greece, why 
not recognize it as true of the great religions and sacred 
books of the East also ? May it not be that God has been pre- 
paring them by the light of the Logos, who is shining in all the 
world, so far as they can understand it, for the time when 
Christianity shall be preached to them ? 

3. Another fault has been committed in the study of the 
sacred books of the East. Christian men who are compelled 
to recognize that there are some good things in them which 
cannot be explained away, try. to explain them as derived from 
divine revelation by some indirect subterranean passage from 
the Jewish religion, or maintain that Christianity, in some 
secret and undiscovered paths, has been brought to bear upon 
them. It has been shown clearly that the Jewish religion 
derived more from other ancient religions than it gave them. 
The Jewish religion derived much from the Babylonians and 

1 See p. 537. 



THE CREDIBILITY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 611 

Persians, and gave very little. The Christian religion has 
been influenced much more by Buddhism than Buddhism has 
been inflaenced by Christianity. 

Some have been alarmed because so many of the ethical say- 
ings of our Lord have been found in the sayings of Jewish 
rabbins before the time of our Lord. Granted that Holy Script- 
ure has derived much from other religions, that only brings 
out one of its characteristics of excellence. It gives the re- 
ligion of Humanity ; it appropriates everything good in man 
or religion found anywhere in the world ; it takes up into 
itself everything that is good; it goes on absorbing the best 
features of other religions, as all the rivers are absorbed by the 
ocean. The national and provincial religions and mere secta- 
rianism have shut themselves up from everything that is 
derived from others. But the religion of Humanity, the uni- 
versal religion, appropriates everything that is good and noble 
from all. 

These faults of advocates and polemic divines have greatly 
injured the cause of Christianity in its relation to other re- 
ligions, and have greatly retarded the influence of the Bible 
upon men of other faiths. But a large number of scholars 
have been studying the science of religion with industry and 
abundant fruit ; they have not hesitated to discern the true 
excellences of other religious books, and to point out the 
defects of Holy Scripture, as a result of the comparative study 
of the sacred books of the world. 

" But what shall we say, then, of the pagan religions which teach 
exactly the same doctrine ? Shall we say they borrowed it from 
Christianity ? That would be doing violence to history. Shall 
we say that, though they use the same words, they did not mean 
the same thing ? That would be doing violence to our sense of 
truth. Why not accept the facts such as they are ? At first, I 
quite admit, some of the facts which I have quoted in my lect- 
ures are startling and disturbing. But, like most facts which 
startle us from a distance, they lose their terror when we look 
them in the face, nay, they often prove a very G-odsend to those 
who are honestly grappling with the difficulties of which religion 
is full. Anyhow, they are facts that must be met, that cannot be 
ignored. And why should they be ignored ? To those who see 



612 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

no difficulties in their own religion, tlie study of other religions 
will create no new difficulties. It will only help them to appre- 
ciate more fully what they already possess. For with all that I 
have said in order to show that other religions also contain all 
that is necessary for salvation, it would be simply dishonest on 
my part were I to hide my conviction that the religion taught by 
Christ, and free as yet from all ecclesiastical fences and intrench- 
ments, is the best, the purest, the truest religion the world has 
ever seen. When I look at the world as it is, I often say that we 
seem to be living two thousand years before, not after, Christ." ^ 

We may now say to all men : All the sacred books of the 
world are accessible to you. Study them, compare them, 
recognize all that is good and noble and true in them all, and 
tabulate the results, and you will be convinced that the Holy 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are true, holy, and 
divine. When we have gone searchingly through them all, the 
sacred books of other religions are as torches of varying size 
and brilliancy, lighting up the darkness of the night ; but the 
Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are like the 
sun, dawning in the earliest writings of the Old Testament, 
rising in prophetic word and priestly thora, in lyric psalm, and 
in sentence of wisdom until the zenith is reached in the 
Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. Take them, 
therefore, as the guide of your religion, your salvation, and your 
life. 

II. Science and the Bible 

The Holy Scriptures of the Christians are now the centre of 
a world-wide contest. We are living in a scientific age which 
demands that every traditional statement shall be tested by 
patient, thorough, and exact criticism. Science explores the 
earth in its heights and depths, its lengths and breadths, in 
search of all the laws which govern it and the realities of 
which it is composed. Science explores the heavens in quest 
of all the mysteries of the universe of God. Science searches 
the body and the soul of man in order to determine his exact 
nature and character. Science investigates all the monuments 
of history, whether they are of stone or of metal, whether they 

1 Max Miiller, Physical Beligion, 1891, pp. 363-364. 



THE CREDIBILITY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 613 

are the product of man's handiwork, or the construction of his 
voice or pen. That man must be lacking in intelligence or in 
observation who imagines that the sacred books of the Chris- 
tian religion or the institutions of the Church can escape the 
criticism of this age. It will not do to oppose science with 
religion, or criticism with faith. Criticism makes it evident 
that a faith which shrinks from criticism is a faith so weak and 
uncertain that it excites suspicion as to its life and reality. 
Science goes on in its exact and thorough work, confident that 
every form of religion which resists it will erelong crumble 
into dust. 

Searchers after truth have found in all ages that they have 
been resisted by the same kind of Pharisees as those who re- 
sisted the teaching of Jesus and of Saint Paul. These are 
always found guarding ancient traditions in venerable tombs, 
while the neglected truth of God is springing up in beautiful 
flowers and plants of grace all around them.^ 

All departments of human investigation sooner or later come 
in contact with the Christian Scriptures. All find something 
that either accords with or conflicts with their investigations. 
If the statements of Holy Scripture are altogether true, infal- 
lible, and inerrant, they ought to exert a controlling influence 
on all these studies. If there is irreconcilable difference 
between the Bible and the results of these studies, the student 
is compelled to choose between them. All the world knows 
the history of the conflict between scientific men and defenders 
of the thesis that the Bible is infallible in all its statements 
about matters of science. So long as this thesis was enforced 
by ecclesiastical authority against scientific men, science was 
throttled ; scientific men took their lives in their hands in 
every investigation. The first stage of the conflict resulted 
in the delivery of science from the thraldom of the ecclesi- 
astics. The next stage of the conflict was the advance of 
science in spite of all the opposition of the dogmaticians, 
until the situation emerged in which science pursued its own 
independent way without giving any heed to the statements 
of the theologians. No real student is checked for a moment 

1 See pp. 8 seq. 



614 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

by any apparent conflict between the results of his science and 
a statement of the Old Testament. He has learned that the 
Bible was not given to teach science but religion, and that the 
statements of the Bible which come in conflict with science 
are, from the point of view of their authors, as a part of 
the human setting of the truth of God, and are not to be 
regarded as part of the true, infallible, divine instruction com- 
mitted to them by the Spirit of God. This is the real situa- 
tion at the present time, however uncomfortable it may be for 
those who still think it necessary to defend the inerrancy of 
the Bible in every particular statement. The question thus 
forces itself upon us, Can we maintain the truthfulness of the 
Holy Scriptures in the face of all these modern sciences ? 

We are obliged to admit that there are scientific errors in 
the Bible, errors of astronomy, of geology, of zoology, of bot- 
any, and of anthropology. In all these respects there is no 
evidence that the author of these sacred writings had any other 
knowledge than that possessed by their cotemporaries. They 
were not in fact taught by the Holy Spirit any higher know- 
ledge of these subjects than others of their age. Their state- 
ments are just such as indicate a correct observation of the 
phenomena as they would appear to an accurate observer at the 
time when they wrote. It is evident in a cursory examination 
that they had not that insight, that foresight, and that grasp of 
conception and power of expression in these matters which 
they exhibit when they wrote concerning matters of religion. 
If, as all must concede, it was not the intent of God to give to 
the ancient world the scientific knowledge of our nineteenth 
century, why should any one suppose that the Divine Spirit 
influenced them in relation to any such matters of science ? 
Why should they be kept from misconception, from misstate- 
ment, and from error ? The divine purpose was to use them as 
religious teachers. So long as they made no mistakes in reli- 
gious instruction, they were trustworthy and reliable, even if 
they erred in some of those matters in which they come in con- 
tact with modern science. The fact that the errors are few 
show us, not that they were restrained from error by an irre- 
sistible impulse of the Divine Spirit, but rather that they were 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 615 

in that exalted spiritual frame of mind which made them so 
anxious to be truthful that they abstained from those extrava- 
gant speculations and crude conceptions which mark the writ- 
ers of ancient times who were less spiritually minded. 

III. The Canon and Inerrancy 

It is maintained by some modern theologians, of the Prince- 
ton School of Theology, that the doctrine of the inerrancy of the 
original autographs of Holy Scripture is an essential doctrine 
of the Christian religion. The General Assembly of the Pres- 
byterian Church in the United States of America condemned 
me for heresy because I declined to say that the original auto- 
graphs were inerrant. The statement upon which I was tried 
and condemned was : 

"It has been taught in recent years, and is still taught by some 
theologians, that one proved error destroys the authority of Script- 
ure. I shall venture to affirm that, so far as I can see, there are 
errors in the Scriptures that no one has been able to explain away ; 
and the theory that they were not in the original text is sheer 
assumption, upon which no mind can rest with certainty. If such 
errors destroy the authority of the Bible, it is already destroyed 
for historians. Men cannot shut their eyes to truth and fact. 
But on what authority do these theologians drive men from the 
Bible by this theory of inerrancy ? The Bible itself nowhere 
ma,kes this claim. The creeds of the Church nowhere sanction it. 
It is a ghost of modern evangelicalism to frighten children. The 
Bible has maintained its authority with the best scholars of our 
time, who with open minds have been willing to recognize any 
error that might be pointed out by Historical Criticism ; for these 
errors are all in the circumstantials and not in the essentials ; they 
are in the human setting, not in the precious jewel itself ; they are 
found in that section of the Bible that theologians commonly 
account for from the providential superintendence of the mind of 
the author, as distinguished from divine revelation itself." ^ 

The decision of the General Assembly was the following : 

" We find that the doctrine of the errancy of Scripture, as it 
came from them to whom and through whom God originally com- 
municated His revelation, is in conflict with the statements of the 

1 Briggs, Authority of Holy Scripture, p. 35. 



616 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

Holy Scripture itself, which asserts that all Scripture or every 
Scripture is given by the inspiration of God (2 Tim. 3^*^), that the 
prophecy came not of old by the vsrill of man, but that holy men 
of God spake as they were moved of the Holy Ghost (2 Peter l^^) ; 
and also with the statements of the standards of the Church which 
assert that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments 
are the Word of God (Larger Catechism, question 3), of infallible 
truth and divine authority (Confession, Chapter I., section 5)." ^ 

This remarkable statement of doctrine is apparently due to 
the chairman of the committee of the General Assembly. Of 
course no scholar could vote for such a proposition ; it shows 
such profound ignorance of Scripture and of the Westminster 
symbols, and it presents such an unjust caricature of my opin- 
ion. In point of fact, all the scholarly members of the Assembly 
protested against it to the number of sixty-three. But they 
were overcome by a majority who, blinded by partisanship, and 
in a panic about the Bible, had not taken the trouble to inform 
themselves as to the real issue and as to the serious conse- 
quences of their votes before the}^ cast them. 

The question in dispute was not whether there are errors in 
the present accessible texts of Holy Scripture, but whether or 
not these errors were in the original autographs. This Assem- 
bly attempted to define what were the original autographs: 
*' Scripture as it came from them to whom and through whom 
God originally communicated His revelation." The Scripture 
in their opinion consisted of the writings as first written down 
by those to whom God communicated His revelation. W^e must 
go back of all the texts till we get to the original autographs 
of the authors before we have the in errant Scripture. What 
has the criticism of the Canon to say to this astonishing dogma ? 

1. We have studied the history of the formation of the 
Canon and then the criticism of the Canon. ^ We have seen that 
the Canon was a gradual formation ; first the Law, then the 
Prophets, then the Writings of the Old Testament, then the 
Gospels, then the Epistles of St. Paul, and finally the Catholic 
Epistles and Apocalypse of the New Testament. The Canoni- 

1 The Case against Professor Briggs, Part III. p. 309. 

2 See Chaps. V., VI. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 617 

cal Scripture was ever historically the Scripture in the text at 
the time recognized by the Synagogue and the Church. No 
one ever thought of searching for the original autographs. 
And from the point of view of canonical criticism it is ever 
the text of Scripture in one's hands that is recognized as ca- 
nonical or not. From this point of view, it is evident that 
what is canonical in Holy Scripture is entirely independent 
of any special form of the text or of the original autographs. 

It is true that the Protestant Reformers and the Puritans in 
their symbolical books made the Greek and Hebrew texts the 
final appeal in matters of religion over against the Roman 
Catholic Church, which made the Latin Vulgate the final 
authority ; but even the Protestants did not think of making 
the original autographs their authority. They knew as well 
as we do that they had them not and could never have them. 
The Protestants appealed to the Greek and Hebrew texts that 
they knew, and devoted themselves chiefly to translating them 
into modern languages to give the Word of God to the people; 
and they used these translations as the Word of God of infalli- 
ble, divine authority. No one in the time of the Reformation 
was so foolhardy as to affirm that " the Canon of Scripture is 
not in the Latin Bible, is not in the Greek Testament of Eras- 
mus, is not in the Hebrew Bible of Bomberg, but is solel}^ and 
alone in the original autographs of the inspired authors," which 
have not one of them been in the possession of the Church 
since the second century a.d. It was a rational position for the 
Council of Trent to make the Latin Vulgate the authoritative 
Bible and to provide for a correct official text. It would be a 
reasonable procedure for a Protestant assembly to decide that 
the Massoretic Hebrew text of Ben Asher and the Greek Bible 
of the Vatican codex should be the final arbiter, as the most 
correct texts at present attainable. But it is altogether irra- 
tional to take the position that the inerrant Bible is solely and 
alone in the original autographs which no one has seen since 
the Church had a Canon, and which no one can ever see. 

When one clearly recognizes the essential principles of ca- 
nonical criticism, he sees clearly that that which is canonical 
in Holy Scripture must be in every recognized text and in 



618 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

every recognized version, and that tiie Canon cannot be con- 
fined to any version, or to any text, still less to the original 
autographs. In point of fact, so far as the evidence goes, the 
original autographs of Holy Scripture were never recognized 
as canonical. It was not until the Holy Writings had been 
copied and circulated that they received that general recogni- 
tion which is essential to canonicity. The copies, which in 
many cases were many degrees distant from the autographs, 
were recognized as canonical ; and in no case, so far as we can 
determine, were the autographs recognized as canonical. 

It is instructive just here to note that the early Church took 
no pains whatever to preserve the autographs of the apostolic 
founders of the Church. No autograph of St, Peter or St. Paul 
or St. John or St. James was known to the early Church ; still 
less an autograph of our Lord and Saviour. ^ 

2. The question of the original autographs is not so simple 
and easy of solution as the majority of this General Assembly 
seem to have thought. The question emerges, Which autograph 
do you seek? What shall we say as regards the story of the 
resurrection of our Lord at the close of the Gospel of Mark? 
There can be no doubt that it was not in the Gospel of Mark 
as that Gospel " came from him to whom and through whom 
God originally communicated His revelation." It was appended 
to Mark. 2 And yet there can be no doubt that this story was 
attached to the Gospel of Mark at an early date, and that it 
has been recognized as no less truly canonical and divinely 
inspired than any other part of the Gospel. Is it now to be 
cast out of the Canon of Holy Scripture because it was not in 
the original autograph of Mark ? And what shall we say of the 
two chief texts of Luke ? ^ Which of these two is the original 
autograph? They have both been recognized by the Church 
for centuries as canonical, one by one section of the Church, 
and the other by another section. Is it first necessary for us 
to determine this question before we can have access to the 
original, inerrant, inspired autographs ? Or will it be sufficient 
to recognize either or both texts as inspired Scripture, although 
they are discrepant and both of them not without errors ? 

1 See p. 190. 2 gee p. 314. s See p. 202. 



THE CREDIBILITY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 619 

If we regard tlie last chapter of Romans as not in the original 
autograph of the Epistle to the Romans,^ does this remove it 
from the Canon of inerrant, inspired Scripture ? And what 
shall we say of the difference between the Hebrew and Greek 
Bibles ? If we compare the Greek version with the Hebrew 
text of the Writings, it is evident that editors and scribes have 
been at work subsequent to the time when the translations were 
made of the texts upon which the one or the other of these 
original authorities rely.^ The additions to Daniel, Esther, 
and Ezra in the Greek version show the work of editors and 
scribes upon these books. There are also serious differences 
in Jeremiah, the Psalter, and the book of Proverbs. Even in 
the Pentateuch the arrangement of the material is different. 
If we maintain that in all cases the Hebrew text should be 
followed, and the work of the scribes upon the Hebrew manu 
scripts which underlie the Greek text should be rejected, we 
are met with the use of the Greek text by the apostles in the 
New Testament and by the Christian Fathers in the sub-apostolic 
age. But what shall we say of the editors and scribes who 
have made the editorial changes, which may be traced in the 
Hebrew text itself ? Can we fix a time when the Divine Spirit 
ceased to guide the sacred scribes who edited and reedited, 
arranged and rearranged the writings of the Old Testament ? 
Will it be necessary to eliminate all the editorial additions and 
glosses, readjust all the transpositions, correct all the mistakes, 
and restore the text to the exact original before we get at the 
original inerrant Scripture ? When any one gives his serious 
attention to the practical work of criticism, as it has been 
described in the pages of this book, he will see in what an 
untenable position he involves himself by recognizing errors in 
all documents accessible to us, and by insisting solely and alone 
upon the inerrancy of the original autographs. In point of 
fact as regards the greater part of the writings of Holy Script- 
ure, it may be said that the original autographs, as they " came 
from them to whom and through whom God originally commu- 
nicated His revelation," were not the ones which were recog- 
nized by the Church as inspired and canonical ; but the Jews 

1 See pp. 315 seq. - 2 See pp. 173, 314. 



620 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and the Christians alike recognized rather the documents as 
they came from the hands of later editors at many stages of 
removal from the original autographs. 

3. It is a most remarkable fact that the original autographs 
of the holy men and prophets, from whom the Holy Scriptures 
came, were edited and changed with so much freedom by the 
later editors from whom our Bible ultimately came. 

One would suppose that no original autograph that ever was 
written could be so holy, inerrant, and safe from change as the 
Logia of Jesus by the apostle Matthew. And yet the Logia 
was used, in part, in quite drastic ways by both our Matthew 
and Luke, and then neglected and ultimately lost. The only 
way in which we can recover it is by the process of criticism. 
The most precious words in the Old Testament are those of the 
Psalter. And yet nothing is more evident than the fact that 
many of the choicest psalms have passed through the hands of 
many editors in a number of minor and major psalters, before 
they attained their present form in our Psalter.^ 

Our Psalter, as it has been used in Jewish and Christian 
worship for two thousand years, is the work of editors as much 
as authors ; and he who would seek the original autographs of 
the original poets has a long and difficult road to travel, and 
one in which no certainty can be attained. One can hardly 
conceive of Dr. Harsha, or even Dr. Warfield, travelling that 
pathway to inerrancy and certainty. 

If inerrancy and certainty are only to be found in this way, 
they will never be found. Certainty has never been found in 
this way. Such autographs the Church and the Synagogue 
have never known. If we could find them, in all probability 
we would see them containing as many errors, if not more, 
than the present texts. This much we do know, that in all 
these editorial matters the scribes made errors before the fixing 
of the Canon, as well as subsequent thereto. Criticism can 
find no errorless scribe, no inerrant person. This is immaterial 
so long as the religious instruction, as given in these books, is 
trustworthy, is truthful and reliable. 

1 See pp. 312, 821. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 621 



IV. Textual Criticism and Credibility 

It is conceded by all biblical scholars at the present time 
that there are errors in all the texts and versions of the Bible 
accessible to us, but it is urged by some dogmaticians that if 
we had the original autographs we would find them free from 
error and altogether inerrant and infallible. From the point 
of view of biblical science this is a mere speculation. It would 
not be worthy of consideration were it not for the fact that it is 
urged as an essential dogma by a dominant party in the Ameri- 
can Presbyterian Church. 

Textual criticism shows that the best texts, versions, and 
citations of these Holy Scriptures that we can get have numer- 
ous and important discrepancies. The errors do not decrease 
in number as we work our way back in the laborious processes 
of criticism toward the original text. The discrepancies be- 
tween the Samaritan and the Massoretic Hebrew codices, 
between the earliest Hebrew manuscripts and the earliest man- 
uscripts of the Greek version, between the New Testament 
citations and the Syriac and Vulgate versions, are so numerous 
that few biblical scholars are able to take a comprehensive 
view of them and to make a competent judgment upon them. 
The most exact textual criticism leaves us with numerous 
errors in Holy Scripture just where we find them in the trans- 
mitted texts of other sacred books. 

How far does the exact condition of the text of the Bible 
impair its credibility? How far does the science of textual 
criticism go to verify the truthfulness of Holy Scripture ? 

1. So far as the Old Testament is concerned, the theory of 
Buxtorf, Heidegger, Turretine, Voetius, Owen, and the Zurich 
Consensus, that the vowel points and accents were original and 
inspired, has been so utterly disproved that no biblical scholar 
of the present day would venture to defend them.^ But can 
their theory of verbal inspiration stand without these sup- 
ports ? Looking at the doctrine of inspiration from the point 
of view of textual criticism, we see at once that there can be 

1 See pp. 220 seq. 



622 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

no inspiration of the written letters or uttered sounds of our 
present Hebrew text; for these are transliterations of the 
original Hebrew letters which have been lost,^ and the sounds 
are traditional, and in many respects artificial and uncertain. 
While there is a general correspondence of these letters and 
sounds so that they give us essentially the original, they do 
not give us exactly the original. The inspiration must there- 
fore lie back of the written letters and the uttered sounds, and 
be sought in that which is common to the old characters and 
the new, the utterance of the voice and the constructions of 
the pen; namely, in the concepts, the sense and meaning that 
they convey. 

" All language or writing is but the vessel, the symbol, or decla- 
ration of the rule, not the rule itself. It is a certain form or 
means by which the divine truth cometh unto us, as things are 
contained in words, and because the doctrine and matter of the 
text is not made unto one but by words and a language which I 
understand; therefore I say, the Scripture in English is the rule 
and ground of my faith, and whereupon I relying have not a 
humane, but a divine authority for my faith." ^ 

Holy Scripture was not meant for the Hebrew and Greek 
nations alone, or for Hebrew and Greek scholars, but for all 
nations and the people of God. It is given to the world in a 
great variety of languages with a great variety of letters and 
sounds, so that the sacred truth approaches each one in his 
native tongue in an appropriate relation to his understanding, 
just as at Pentecost the same Divine Spirit distributed Himself 
in cloven tongues of fire upon a large number of different per- 
sons. Thus every faithful translation as an instrument conveys 
the Divine Word to those who read or hear it : 

"For it is not the shell of the words, but the kernel of the 
matter which commends itself to the consciences of men, and that 
is the same in all languages. The Scriptures in English, no less 
than in Hebrew or Greek, display its lustre and exert its power 
and discover the character of its divine original." ^ 

This is shown by the process of translation itself. The 

1 See p. 170. ^ Lyford, Plain Man's Sense Exercised, etc., p. 49. 

3 Matthew Poole, Blow at the Boot, London, 1679, p. 234. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 623 

translator does not transliterate the letters and syllables, trans- 
mute sounds, give word for word, transfer foreign words and 
idioms ;, but he ascertains the sense, the idea, and then gives 
expression to the idea, the sense, in the most appropriate way. 
It is admitted that close, literal translations are bad, mislead- 
ing, worse than paraphrases ; Aquila has even been a warning 
in this regard. 1 The method of Ezra is far preferable, to give 
the sense to the people without the pedantry and subtilties of 
scholarship. As another Puritan says : 

"ISTow, what shall a poor unlearned Christian do, if he hath 
nothing to rest his poore soul on ? The originals he understands 
not ; if he did, the first copies are not to be had ; he cannot tell 
whether the Hebrew or Greek copies be the right Hebrew or the 
right Greek, or that which is said to be the meaning of the Hebrew 
or Greek, but as men tell us, who are not prophets and may mis- 
take. Besides, the transcribers were men and might err. These 
considerations let in Atheisme like a flood." ^ 

It is a merciful providence that divine inspiration is not con- 
fined to particular words and phrases, and grammatical, logical, 
or rhetorical constructions ; and that the same divine truth 
may be presented in a variety of synonymous words and phrases 
and sentences. It is the method of divine revelation to give 
the same laws, doctrines, narratives, expressions of emotion, 
and prophecies in great variety of forms. None of these are 
adequate to convey the divine idea, but in their combination 
it is presented from all those varied points of view that rich, 
natural languages afford, in order that the mind and heart may 
grasp the idea itself, appropriate and reproduce it in other 
forms of language, and in the motives, principles, and habits 
of e very-day life. The external word, written or spoken, is 
purely instrumental, conveying divine truth to the soul of 
man, as the eye and the ear are instrumental senses for its 
appropriation by the soul. It does not work ex opere operato 
by any mechanical or magical power. 

As the Lutherans tend to lay the stress upon the sacraments, 
in their external operation, and the Anglicans upon the exter- 
nal organization of the Church, so the Reformed have ever been 

1 See p. lOi. 2 Rich. Capel, Bemains, London, 1658. 



624 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

in peril of laying the stress on the letter, the external operation 
of the Word of God. The Protestant principle struggles against 
this confounding of the means of grace with the divine grace 
itself, this identification of the instrument and the divine agent, 
in order therefore to their proper discrimination. This is the 
problem left unsolved by the Reformation, on which the sepa- 
rate churches of Protestantism have been working, and which 
demands a solution from the Church of the nineteenth century. 
Here the most radical question is that of the Divine Word and 
its relation to the work of the Holy Spirit. This solved, all 
the other questions will be solved. Herein the churches of the 
Reformation may be harmonized. Its solution can come only 
from a further working out of the critical principles of the 
Reformation ; not by logical deduction from the creeds and 
scholastic dogmas alone, but by a careful induction of the facts 
from the Scriptures themselves. The fundamental distinction 
between the external and the internal word is well stated by 
John Wallis, one of the clerks of the Westminster Assembly : 

^^The Scriptures in themselves are a Lanthorn rather than a 
Light; they shine, indeed, but it is alieno lumine; it is not their 
own, bat a borrowed light. It is God which is the true light that 
shines to us in the Scriptures ; and they have no other light in 
them, but as they represent to us somewhat of God, and as they 
exhibit and hold forth God to us, who is the true light that ^ en- 
lighteneth every man that comes into the world.' It is a light, 
then, as it represents God unto us, who is the original light. It 
transmits some rays ; some beams of the divine nature ; but they 
are refracted, or else we should not be able to behold them. They 
lose much of their original lustre by passing through this medium, 
and appear not so glorious to us as they are in themselves. They 
represent God's simplicity obliquated and refracted, by reason of 
many inadequate conceptions ; God condescending to the weak- 
ness of our capacity to speak to us in our own dialect." ^ 

The Scriptures are lamps, vessels of the most holy character, 
but no less vessels of the divine grace than were the apostles 
and prophets who spake and wrote them. As vessels they have 
come into material contact with the forces of this world, with 
human weakness, ignorance, prejudice, and folly ; their forms 

1 Sermons, London, 1791, pp. 127-128. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 625 

have been modified in the course of the generations, but their 
divine contents remain unchanged. We shall never be able to 
attain the sacred writings in the original letters and sounds and 
forms in which they gladdened the eyes of those who first saw 
them, and rejoiced the hearts of those who first heard them. 
If the external words of these originals were inspired, it does 
not profit us. We are cut off from them forever. Interposed 
between us and them is the tradition of centuries and even 
millenniums. Doubtless by God's " singular care and provi- 
dence they have been kept pure in all ages, and are therefore 
authentical."^ Doubtless throughout the whole work of the 
authors " the Holy Spirit was present, causing His energies to 
flow into the spontaneous exercises of the writers' faculties, 
elevating and directing where need be, and everywhere se- 
curing the errorless expression in language of the thought 
designed by God " ; ^ but we cannot in the symbolical or his- 
torical use of the term call this providential care of His Word, 
or superintendence over its external production, inspiration. 
Such providential care and superintendence is not different in 
kind with regard to the Word of God, the Church of God, or 
the forms of the sacraments. Inspiration lies back of the 
external letter : it is that which gives the Word its efficacy ; 
it is the divine afflatus which enlightened and guided holy 
men to apprehend the truth of God in its appropriate forms, 
assured them of their possession of it, and called and enabled 
them to make it known to the Church by voice and pen. This 
made their persons holy, their utterances holy, their writings 
holy, but only as the instruments, not as the holy thing itself. 
The divine Logos — that is the sum and substance of the Script- 
ure, the holy of holies, whence the Spirit of God goes forth 
through the holy place of the circumstantial sense of type and 
symbol, and literary representation, into the outer court of the 
words and sentences, through them to enter by the ear and eye 
into the hearts of men with enlightening, sanctifying, and sav- 
ing power : 

1 Westminster Confession of Faith, 1. viii. 

'■^ A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, art. "Inspiration," Presbyterian Eeview, 
IL 231. 

2s 



626 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

^^ Inspiration is more than superintending guidance, for that ex- 
presses but an external relation between the Spirit and writer. But 
Inspiration is an influence within the soul, divine and supernatural, 
working through all the writers in one organizing method, making of 
the many one, by all one book, the Book of God, the Book for man, 
divine and human in all its parts ; having the same relation to all 
other books that the Person of the Son of God has to all other men, 
and that the Church of the living God has to all other institutions.'' ^ 

True criticism never disregards the letter, but reverently 
and tenderly handles every letter and syllable of the Word of 
God, striving to purify it from all dross, brushing away the 
dust of tradition and guarding it from the ignorant and pro- 
fane. But it is with no superstitious dread of magical virtue 
or virus in it, or anxious fears lest it should dissolve in the 
hands, but with an assured trust that it is the tabernacle of 
God, through whose external courts there is an approach to 
the Lord Jesus Himself. " Bibliolatry clings to the letter ; 
spirituality in the letter finds the spirit and does not disown 
the letter which guided to the spirit." ^ 

Such criticism has accomplished great things for the New 
Testament text. It will do even more for the Old Testament 
so soon as the old superstitious reverence for Massoretic tradi- 
tion has been laid aside by Christian scholars. Critical theories 
first come into conflict .with the church doctrine of inspiration 
when they deny the inspiration of the truth and facts of 
Scripture ; when they superadd another authoritative and pre- 
dominant test, whether it be the reason, the conscience, or the 
religious feeling. But this is to go beyond the sphere of 
evangelical criticism and enter into the fields of rationalistic, 
ethical, or mystical criticism. Evangelical criticism conflicts 
only with false views of inspiration. It disturbs the inspiration 
of versions, the inspiration of the Massoretic text, the inspiration 
of particular letters, syllables, and external words and expres- 
sions ; and truly all those who rest upon these external things 
ought to be disturbed and driven from the letter to the spirit, 
from clinging to the outer walls, to seek Him who is the sum 
and substance, the Master and the King of the Scriptures. 

1 H. B. Smith, Sermon on Inspiration, 1855, p. 27. ^ in I.e., p. 36. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 627 



V. The Higher Criticism and Credibility 

This is the most delicate and difficult question of the Higher 
Criticism with reference to all literature, but especially with 
reference to Biblical Literature. That there are errors in the 
present text of our Bible, and inconsistencies, it is vain to deny. 
There are chronological, geographical, and other circumstantial 
inconsistencies and errors which we should not hesitate to 
acknowledge. Such circumstantial and incidental errors as 
arise from the inadvertence or lack of information of an author, 
are not an impeachment of his credibility. If we distinguish 
between revelation and inspiration, and yet insist upon inerrancy 
with reference to the latter as well as the former, we virtually 
do away with the distinction. No mere man can escape alto- 
gether human errors unless divine revelation set even the most 
familiar things in a new and infallible light, and also so control 
him that he cannot make a slip of the eye or the hand, a fault 
in the imagination, in conception, in reasoning, in rhetorical 
figure, or in grammatical expression ; and indeed so raise him 
above his fellows that he shall see through all their errors in 
science and philosophy as well as theology, and anticipate the 
discoveries in all branches of knowledge by thousands of years. 
Errors of inadvertence in minor details, where the author's posi- 
tion and character are well known, do not destroy his credibility 
as a witness in any literature or any court of justice. It is not 
to be presumed that divine inspiration lifted the author above 
his age, any more than was necessary to convey the divine reve- 
lation and the divine instruction with infallible certainty to 
mankind. We have to take into account the extent of the 
author's human knowledge, his point of view and type of 
thought, his methods of reasoning and illustration. The ques- 
tion of credibility is to be distinguished from that of infalli- 
bility. The form is credible, the substance alone is infallible. 

The Higher Criticism studies all the literary phenomena of 
Holy Scripture. It has thus far done an inestimable service in 
the removal of the traditional theories from the sacred books, 
so that they may be studied in their real structure and character. 



628 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

The Higher Criticism recognizes faults of grammar and rhetoric, 
and of logic in the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. The bib- 
lical authors used the language with which they were familiar ; 
some of them classic Hebrew, others of them dialectic and cor- 
rupted Hebrew. Some of them have a good prose style ; others 
of them have a dull, tedious, pedantic style. Some of them 
are poets of the highest rank ; others of them write such infe- 
rior poetry that one is surprised that they did not use prose. 
Some of them reason clearly, profoundly, and convincingly ; 
others of them reason in a loose, obscure, and unconvincing 
manner. Some of them present the truth like intuitions of 
light ; others labour with it, and eventually deliver it in a crude 
and undeveloped form. The results of these studies show that 
in all these respects the biblical authors were left to themselves, 
to their own individualities and idiosyncrasies. All these mat- 
ters belong to the manner and method of their instruction. 
Errors in these formal things do not impair the infallibility of 
the substance, the religious instruction itself. 

The Higher Criticism shows us the process by which the 
sacred books were produced ; that the most of them were com- 
posed by unknown authors ; that they have passed through the 
hands of a considerable number of unknown editors, who have 
brought together the older material without removing discre- 
pancies, inconsistencies, and errors. Take the Pentateuch, the 
earliest canon of the Old Testament. It is composed of four 
great documents, whose authors are unknown to us. These doc- 
uments were consolidated by an unknown editor in the times of 
the Kestoration. Each of these documents is made up of still 
older documents and sources. ^ These may, within certain 
limits, be assigned to their times of composition, but not to 
their authors. In this process of editing, arranging, addi- 
tion, subtraction, reconstruction, and consolidation, extending 
through many centuries, what evidence have we that these 
unknown editors were kept from error in all their work ? 
With the precious divine instruction in their hands it seems 
altogether likely that they were left to their honest human 
judgment without any constraint or restraint of a divine iniiu- 

^ See p. 322. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 629 

ence, just as later copyists and editors have been left to them- 
selves. They were men of God, and judging from their work, 
they were guided by the Divine Spirit in their apprehension 
and expression of the divine instruction, but also judging from 
their work, it seems most probable that they were not guided 
by the Divine Spirit in their grammar, in their rhetoric, in 
their logical expressions, in their arrangement of their material, 
or in their general editorial work. In all these matters they 
were left to those errors, which even the most faithful and 
most scrupulous writers will sometimes make. Unless we take 
some such position we are really exposed to the peril of making 
the Holy Spirit the author of bad grammar, of the incorrect 
use of words, of inelegant expressions, and of disorderly 
arrangement of material ; which, indeed, was charged upon the 
critics of the seventeenth century by their earliest opponents. ^ 

From the point of view of the Higher Criticism, we are not 
prepared to admit errors in the Scriptures, until they shall be 
proven. Very many of those alleged have already received 
sufficient or plausible explanation ; others are in dispute be- 
tween truth-seeking scholars, and satisfactory explanations 
may hereafter be given. New difficulties are constantly arising 
and being overcome. The question whether there are errors is 
a question of fact to which all theories and doctrines must 
yield. It cannot be determined by a 'priori definitions and 
statements on either side. Indeed the original autographs 
have been lost for ages and can never be recovered. How can 
we determine whether they were absolutely errorless or not ? 
To assume that it must be so, as a deduction from the theory 
of verbal inspiration, is to beg the whole question. 

Richard Baxter truly says: 

^^ And here I must tell you a great and needful truth, which . . . 
Christians fearing to confess, by overdoing tempt men to Infidelity. 
The Scripture is like a man's body, where some parts are but for 
the preservation of the rest, and may be maimed without death. 
The sense is the soul of the Scripture, and the letters but the 
body or vehicle. The doctrine of the Creed, Lord's Prayer and 
Decalogue, Baptism and the Lord's Supper is the vital part, 

1 See p. 276. 



630 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

and Christianity itself. The Old Testament letter (written as we 
have it about Ezra's time) is that vehicle, which is as imperfect 
as the revelation of these times was. But as after Christ's incar- 
nation and ascension the Spirit was more abundantly given, and 
the revelation more perfect and sealed, so the doctrine is more 
full, and the vehicle or body, that is, the words, are less imperfect 
and more sure to us ; so that he that doubteth the truth of some 
words in the Old Testament, or of some circumstances in the 
New, hath no reason therefore to doubt of the Christian religion, 
of which these writings are but the vehicle or body, suflB.cient to 
ascertain us of the truth of the History and Doctrine." ^ 

Higher Criticism comes into conflict with the authority of 
Scripture when it finds that its doctrinal statements are not 
authoritative and its revelations are not credible. If the 
credibility of a book is impeached, its divine authority and 
inspiration are also impeached. But to destroy credibility 
something more must be presented than errors in matters of 
detail that do not affect the author's scope of argument or his 
religious instructions. It is an unsafe position to assume that 
we must first prove the credibility, inerrancy, and infallibility 
of a book ere we accept its authority. If inquirers waited 
until all the supposed errors in our canonical books were satis- 
factorily explained, they would never accept the Bible as a 
divine revelation. To press the critics to 'this dilemma, iner- 
rant or uninspired, might be to catch them on one of the horns 
if they were not critical enough to detect the fallacy and 
escape, but it would be more likely to catch the people, who 
know nothing of criticism, and so undermine and destroy their 
faith. 

The Higher Criticism has already strengthened the credi- 
bility of Scripture. It has studied the human features of the 
Bible and learned the wondrous variety of form and colour 
assumed by the divine revelation. Many of the supposed 
inconsistencies have been found to be different modes of repre- 
senting the same thing, complementary to one another and 
combining to give a fuller representation than any one mode 
could ever have given; as the two sides of the stereoscopic view 
give a representation superior to that of the ordinary photo- 

1 The Catechizing of Families, 1683, p. 36. 



THE CREDIBILITY OF HOLY SCEIPTURE 631 

graph. The unity of statement found in the midst of such 
wondrous variety of detail in form and colour is much more 
convincing than a unity of mere coincidence such as the older 
harmonists sought to obtain by stretching and straining the 
Scriptures on the procrustean bed of their hair-splitting scho- 
lasticism. Many of the supposed inconsistencies have been 
found to arise from different stages of divine revelation, in each 
of which God condescended to the weakness and the ignorance 
of men, and gave to them the knowledge that they could appro- 
priate, and held up to them ideals that they could understand 
as to their essence if not in all their details. The earlier are 
shadows and types, crude and imperfect representations of 
better things to follow. ^ IMany of the supposed inconsistencies 
result from the popular and unscientific language of the Bible, 
thus approaching the people of God in different ages in con- 
crete forms and avoiding the abstract. The inconsistencies 
have resulted from the scholastic abstractions of those who 
would use the Bible as a text-book, but they do not exist in 
the concrete of the Bible itself. Many of the supposed incon- 
sistencies arise from a different method of logic and rhetoric 
in the Oriental writers and the attempt of modern scholars to 
measure them by Occidental methods. Many of the incon- 
sistencies result from the neglect to appreciate the poetic and 
imaginative element in the Bible and a lack of sesthetic sense 
on the part of its interpreters. The Higher Criticism has 
already removed a large number of difficulties, and will remove 
many more when it has become a more common study among 
scholars. 

yi. Historical Criticism and Credibility 

"We have seen that there are historical mistakes in Holy 
Scripture, mistakes of chronology and geography, errors as to 
historical events and persons, discrepancies and inconsistencies 
in the histories which cannot be removed by any legitimate 
method of interpret ation.^ 

The Historical Criticism of the Old Testament finds discre- 

1 Heb. 85, lOS 11^0 . Col. 2i'. ^ See pp. 512 seq. 



632 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

pancies between the parallel narratives of Kings and Chronicles, 
and between the different sources which have been compacted 
by later editors in the Hexateuch, and in the prophetic his- 
torians. A comparison of these with the prophetical and the 
poetical writings also makes it evident that there are historical 
errors in these books. It is extremely improbable that these 
are all due to copyists and scribes who worked upon the sacred 
writings subsequent to the formation of the Canon. It is more 
reasonable to suppose that, in all this historical framework of 
the divine revelation, the sacred writers and scribes were left 
to themselves to make those few mistakes, which the best men 
will sometimes make in their most conscientious and pains- 
taking writing of history. 

All such errors are just where you would expect to find 
them in accurate, truthful writers of history in ancient times. 
They used with fidelity the best sources of information acces- 
sible to them : ancient poems, popular traditions, legends and 
ballads, regal and family archives, codes of law, and ancient 
narratives. 1 There is no evidence that they received any of 
this history by revelation from God. There is no evidence 
that the Divine Spirit corrected their narratives either when 
they were lying uncomposed in their minds, or written in man- 
uscripts. The purpose of the ancient historians was to give 
the history of God's redemptive workings. There is evidence 
that they were guided by the Divine Spirit in the conception 
of their plan, and in the working of it out so as to give the 
religious education which is embedded in these histories. This 
made it necessary that there should be no essential errors in 
the redemptive facts and agencies, but it did not make it neces- 
sary that there should be no mistakes in dates, in places, and 
in persons, so long as these did not change the religious les- 
sons or the redemptive facts. None of the mistakes, discre- 
pancies, and errors which have been discovered disturb the great 
religious lessons of biblical history. These lessons are the 
only ones whose credibility we are concerned to defend. All 
other things belong to the human framework of the divine 
story, and it is altogether probable that in this framework the 

1 See pp. 555 seq. 



THE CREDIBILITY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 633 

authors were left to their own honest judgment. They do not 
show in their historical writing that insight, foresight, and 
grasp Avhich they show when they are pointing the religious 
lessons of history. Where that insight, foresight, and grasp 
are lacking, we may know that the writers have been left to 
themselves, to the free exercise of their human faculties. 

Thus all departments of the study of Holy Scripture lead to 
the result that there are numerous errors of detail in Holy 
Scripture, that there are no such things as inerrant documents 
of any kind; but that the substance of Holy Scripture, the 
divine teaching as to religion, faith, and morals, is errorless 
and infallible. 



CHAPTER XXV 

THE TSUTHTUXNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

All departments of Biblical Criticism lead us to errors in the 
Holy Scriptures. The sciences which approach the Bible from 
without and the sciences which study it from within agree as 
to the essential facts of the case. In all matters which come 
within the sphere of human observation, and which constitute 
the framework of the divine instruction, errors may be found. 
Can the truthfulness of Scripture be maintained by those who 
recognize these errors ? 

It is claimed by some dogmatic theologians and their parti- 
sans, that *' a proved error in Scripture contradicts not only our 
doctrine, but the Scripture claims and, therefore, its inspiration 
in making those claims."^ This statement challenges scientific 
men, historians, and biblical scholars to abandon either their 
studies or their Bible. In reply to such a challenge scholars 
say to these dogmaticians : " There are errors in the Bible. 
Your dogma is a piece of human folly and presumption." This 
party defend their thesis by an a priori argument. They 
say : " God is true. He speaks a true word. His word is an 
inerrant word. The Bible is the word of God. Therefore the 
Bible is inerrant." This argument is plausible, but superficial 
and specious. Both its premises are untrustworthy. 

I. Is THE Bible the Word of God? 

The minor premise of their argument, that the Bible is the 
word of God, needs qualification and explanation ; otherwise it 
begs the whole question. The Bible is the word of God in the 
sense that its essential contents are the word of God. But it 

1 See p. 609. 
634 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 635 

is not the word of God in the sense that its every word, sen- 
tence, and clause is the word of God. From that point of 
view we must rather say the Bible contains the word of God. 
The Bible is the word of God in the sense that it contains a 
divine word of religious instruction to men. But we must 
distinguish in the Bible between the divine word of instruc- 
tion and the human vessel which contains that divine word. 
The errors of Holy Scripture are in the vessel, the frame- 
work, the setting ; not in the contents, or the substance of the 
Bible. Therefore even if the major premise be true that a 
divine word must be inerrant, the corrected minor premise 
would only lead to the conclusion that the divine word of in- 
struction in the Bible is inerrant, and it would leave room 
for errors in the human setting. 

There is no a 'priori reason why the substantial truthfulness 
of the Bible should not be consistent with circumstantial errors. 
God Himself did not speak, according to the Hebrew Script- 
ures, more than a few words, in theophanies, which are recorded 
here and there in the Old Testament. God speaks in much 
the greater part of the Old Testament through the voices and 
pens of the human authors of the Scriptures. Did the human 
voice and pen in all the numerous writers and editors of Holy 
Scripture prior to the completion of the Canon always deliver 
an inerrant word ? 

Even if all the writers were so possessed of the Holy Spirit 
as to be merely passive in His hands, the question arises : Can 
the finite voice and the finite pen deliver and express the iner- 
rant truth of God? If the language, and the style, and the 
dialect, and the rhetoric are all natural to the inspired man, is 
it possible for these to express the infinite truth of God ? How 
can an imperfect word, sentence, and clause express a perfect 
divine truth ? It is evident that the writers of the Bible were 
not as a rule in the ecstatic state. The Holy Spirit did not 
move their hands or their lips. He suggested to their minds 
and hearts the divine truth they were to teach. They received 
it by intuition in the forms of their reason. They framed it in 
conception, in imagination, and in fancy. They delivered it in 
the logical and rhetorical forms of speech. If the divine truth 



636 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

passed through the conception and imagination of the human 
mind, did the human mind conceive it fully without any defect, 
without any fault, without an}^ shading of error ? Had the 
human conception no limitations to its reception of the divine 
truth ? Had the human imagination and fancy no colours to 
impart to the holy instruction ? Did the human mind add 
nothing to it in reasoning or conception ? Was it delivered in 
its entirety exactly as it was received ? How can we be sure of 
this when we see the same doctrine in such variety of forms, 
all partial, all inadequate ? How can we know this when we 
find the same ethical principle in such a variet}^ of shading ? 
If the human medium could hardly fail to modify the divine 
truth received by it in revelation, how much more must the 
human medium influence the divine instruction in connec- 
tion with biblical history, lyric poetry, sentences of wisdom, 
and works of the imagination which make up the body of the 
Old Testament. Here the mass of the material was derived 
from human sources of information : the history depended upon 
oral and documentary evidence ; the lyric poetry was the ex- 
pression of human emotion ; the sentence of wisdom was the 
condensation of human ethical experience ; the works of the 
imagination were efforts to clothe religious lessons in artistic 
forms of grace and beauty. All that we can claim for the 
Divine Spirit in the production of these parts of the Old Tes- 
tament is an inspiration which suggests the religious lessons to 
be imparted. 

If, as some claim, in addition, there was a providential super- 
intendence guarding the biblical writers from every kind of 
error, we are compelled to state that this guarding from error 
is the matter in contention. It cannot be assumed. It has to 
be proven. It is improbable, and it cannot be accepted except 
through the most conclusive reasons, which no one has yet 
been able to present. 

It is plain, therefore, that the presumption is that the human 
spokesman of the divine word has given the divine word in as 
true and original a form as possible ; and yet that the limita- 
tions of his mind, his language, and the circumstances of his 
time make it probable that he could give it only partially, and 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 637 

that he would accompany its expression with such errors as 
would spring from his ignorance and inadvertence in cir- 
cumstantial matters. 



II. Must God speak Inerrant Words to Man? 

The major premise of this argument is also specious and 
needs rectification. We cannot assume that when God speaks 
to men He must always speak an inerrant word. God is true, 
He is the truth. There is no error or falsehood in Him. He 
cannot lie. He cannot mislead or deceive His creatures. 
There can be no doubt of this. But the question arises, 
When the infinite God speaks to finite man, must He speak 
words which are inerrant? This depends not only upon 
God's speaking, but upon man's hearing, and also upon the 
means of communication between God and man. It is neces- 
sary to show the capacity of man to receive the inerrant word 
and the adequacy of the means to convey the inerrant word as 
well as the inerrancy of God, before we can be sure that God 
can only communicate inerrant words to man. We may be 
certain of the inerrancy of the speaker of the word, but how 
can it be shown that the means of communication are inerrant, 
or that man is capable of receiving an inerrant word ? It is 
necessary that we should consider that in all His relations to 
man and nature God condescends. The finite can only con- 
tain a part of the infinite. God limits Himself when He 
imparts anything of Himself to the creature. In the con- 
verse of heaven we may say that there may be inerrant com- 
munications. In the commands of God to seraphs and angels 
God may be conceived of as speaking inerrant words. But 
has God, in fact, spoken inerrant words to weak, ignorant, sin- 
ful men in a world so imperfect and inharmonious as ours? 
We may argue from analogies. 

1. The book of nature discloses much of the glory and 
power and wisdom of the God in creation and providence. 
But are these disclosures inerrant? Can we formulate an 
exact doctrine of the attributes of God from these disclosures 
of nature ? No one believes it. Nature is incapable of doing 



638 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

any more than of disclosing faint, partial, and fallible words 
of God. The material universe is incapable of doing any more 
than to give, in many varying colours, faint reflections of the 
light of the spiritual world. 

It may be asked, "May not a revelation in nature, though in- 
complete, be inerrant as far as it goes ? " To this it may be 
replied, yes, if it go only so far in its incompleteness as to issue 
forth from God Himself. But if it go so far as to enter into 
the realm of external nature and mingle with the physical it 
will go so far as to lose its inerrancy. The inerrant word of 
God in nature can be determined only by eliminating the essen- 
tial word from all the colouring and all the formal inexactness 
and deflection from the normal, which its environment in nat- 
ure involves. 

2. The revelation of God through the patriarchs and 
prophets of the Old Testament was sometimes accompanied 
by theophanies. In theophanies God manifests Himself to the 
human senses of sight, hearing, and occasionally of touch, by 
assuming some form discernible by the senses. Usually God 
appears in some form of light or fire, sometimes as an angel or 
man, sometimes in a voice and sound. These forms are not 
the real form of God ; they are forms which He condescends 
to assume for a purpose. They do not any of them give an 
inerrant representation of the invisible God. The law forbids 
Israel to represent God under any external form whatever. ^ 
Those who worship Him, worship Him in spirit and in fidelity. 
God does not give an inerrant representation of Himself in the 
forms of time and space within the material universe. And 
yet these manifestations are the stepping-stones of Biblical 
History. The theophanies of the Old Testament lead on to 
the Christophanies of the New Testament.'^ They are indeed 
the fundamental realities upon which all the divine revelation 
in word depend. 

3. If God does not reveal Himself inerrantly in the great 
works of nature, or in theophanies, why should we suppose 
that He makes an inerrant revelation when He makes a com- 
munication through the human spirit? It is quite true that 

1 Deut. 415-19. 2 See p. 542. 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 639 

we are now rising from the material into the spiritual world. 
Man is akin with deity by the inheritance of the reason and 
all the wondrous faculties associated therewith. God may, 
therefore, reveal Himself as Spirit to the spirit of men, far 
more freely, fully, and clearly than in the forms of the material 
universe. And yet we have to 'consider the immense distance 
between the condescending God and the most exalted human 
spirit. If the human spirit is capable of receiving an inerrant 
word, we may believe that God would communicate it. But is 
the human spirit capable ? We know in our experience in 
communicating one with another how extremely difficult it is 
to transmit an inerrant message. The utmost pains have to be 
taken. We cannot trust the mind ; we must make a record 
that cannot change. We know that it is impracticable to 
teach the truth inerrantly to the ignorant and the unprepared, 
even so far as we may have it. The instruction must be 
adapted by the teacher to the pupil. The same truth must be 
taught differently in an infant class, from the pulpit, through 
the daily press, in the college class-room, in a scientific treatise. 
A different training and different qualifications are necessary in 
order to do successfully any of these different things. In each 
one of these the truth is necessarily deprived of some portion 
of its completeness and truthfulness. It seems to be impossible 
for a teacher to convey the truth exactly as he sees it, or to 
avoid so stating it that errors may not spring up on every side. 
We know in part, we tell what we know in part. We are true 
so far as we can be ; but we cannot be inerrant in our speech 
or in our writing, even with regard to that measure of truth 
which we really possess. If this is true in the relation of 
human spirit with human spirit, how much more may it be true 
of the Divine Spirit in its relation to the human spirit ? 

4. Jesus had many things to say to His disciples that they 
could not bear, that they could not understand. ^ The Divine 
Teacher could not teach them because they were incapable of 
receiving His teaching. If the apostles were incapable of the 
teaching of Jesus, who condescended to become a man, to live 
with them, and to speak to them in their own language, in their 

1 John 1612. 



640 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTUEE 

own idiom, in their own metliods of instruction ; if He had to 
employ parables, which still remain the mysteries of the Gos- 
pels, which are capable of numerous erroneous interpretations ; 
if His own wonderful sentences of wisdom are so capable of 
erroneous application, how much more difficult for the Divine 
Spirit to communicate to men by internal suggestion divine 
truth in such inerrant forms that the prophets and apostles 
could only deliver it in speech and pen in the same inerrant 
forms in which they received it. You may say that the para- 
bles and sentences of Jesus are inerrant, that the fault is in 
the interpretation. But why were those parables and sentences 
not given in such words and sentences as would make their 
meaning clear for all time and avoid erroneous interpretation ? 
The only answer we can give is that Jesus could not give His 
teaching in inerrant forms ; the Holy Spirit could not com- 
municate the inerrant word to men without, in a measure, 
depriving it of its inerrancy. 

Thus the analogy of divine revelation in other forms, and of 
the communication between men and men, and especially be- 
tween Jesus and His apostles, make it altogether probable that 
the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures does not carry with it 
inerrancy in every particular. It was sufficient if the divine 
communication was given with such clearness as to guide men 
aright in a religious life; it was sufficient that they knew as- 
suredly that God could not deceive or mislead them, but 
would give them true, faithful, reliable guidance in holy 
things. The errors of Holy Scripture are not errors of 
falsehood, or of deceit ; they are such errors of ignorance, 
inadvertence, of partial and inadequate knowledge, and of 
incapacity to express the whole truth of God as belong to 
man as man, and from which we have no evidence that even an 
inspired man was relieved. Just as the light is seen, not in its 
pure, unclouded rays, but in the beautiful colours of the spec- 
trum, as its beams are broken up by the angles and discolora- 
tions which obstruct their course, so it is with the truth of 
God. Its revelation and communication meet with such ob- 
stacles in human nature and in this world of ours, that men 
are capable of receiving it only in divers portions and divers 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 641 

manners, as it comes to them through the divers tempera- 
ments and points of view and styles of the biblical writers. 
Few men are capable of discerning more than one portion of 
these colours — the most capable know in part. Not till the 
day which closes the dispensation dawns will any one know 
the whole ; for not till then will men be capable of seeing the 
Christ as He is, and of knowing God in His glory. 

The major premise of the a priori argument is not an intui- 
tion ; it lacks sufficient evidence to sustain it. All the evi- 
dence that we can gain points the other way. The only thing 
that we can say is that God's word to man will be as inerrant 
as possible, considering the human and defective media through 
which it is communicated. There is an intrinsic improbability 
that we have a Bible inerrant any further than that religious 
instruction extends which is necessary for the guidance of God's 
people in every successive epoch in the development of divine 
revelation. 

III. Gradual Development of the Hebrew Religion 

The position we have thus far attained enables us to dispose 
of the greater difficulties which lie in the way of the truthful- 
ness of Holy Scripture. These are religious, doctrinal, and 
ethical difficulties. 

The religion of the Old Testament is a religion which, with 
all its excellence as compared with the other religions of 
the ancient world, inculcates some things which are hard 
to reconcile with an inerrant revelation. The sacrifice of 
Jephthah's daughter,^ and the divine command to Abraham to 
offer up his son as a whole burnt-offering,^ seem unsuited to 
a divine religion. There are many who try to explain these 
difficulties away by arbitrary exegesis and conjectures supple- 
mentary to the narratives, but in vain. The narrative in 
Judges leaves upon our minds the indelible impression that 
Jephthah did a praiseworthy act when he sacrificed his daugh- 
ter to God ; and there can be no doubt that God commanded 
the sacrifice of Isaac, even if He subsequently accepted a sub- 

1 Jd. 1129-40. 2 Gen. 22. 

2t 



642 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

stitute in an animal victim. There is, indeed, no prohibition 
of the offering up of children in the earliest codes of the 
Hexateuch. The prohibition was first made in the Deuter- 
onomic code and originated somewhat late in the history of 
Israel. The early Hebrews shared with the Canaanites and 
other neighbouring nations in the practice of offering up their 
children in the flame to God. From the point of view of sacri- 
fice nothing could be more acceptable than the best-beloved 
son, except the offerer himself. The higher revelation teaches 
the offering of the whole body and soul to God in the spiritual 
sacrifice of an everlasting ministry. ^ But it required cen- 
turies of training before that divine lesson could be taught and 
learned. The Hebrews were taught the principle of sacrifice 
as they were able to learn it. God accepted the sacrifice of 
Jephthah's daughter. He graciously accepted the ram instead 
of Isaac, though He stated His rightful claim upon the beloved 
son. He provided a sacrificial system which gradually grew 
in wealth of symbolism through the ages of Jewish history ; 
and animal and grain sacrifices were made the normal form of 
worship. 

But the prophets, with great difficulty and increasing oppo- 
sition from priests and people, gradually taught them that the 
sacrifices must be of broken and contrite hearts, and of humble, 
cheerful spirits. But what pleasure can God take in the blood 
of animals or in smoking altars ? How could the true God 
ever prescribe such puerilities? This is the inquiry of the 
higher religion of our day. We can only say that God was 
training Israel to understand the meaning of a higher sacrifice; 
even the obedience of the Christ in a holy life and a martyr 
death in the service of God and of humanity, and of the similar 
sacrifice that every child of God is called upon to make. 

The offering up of children and of domestic animals and 
grains was all a preparatory discipline for the religion of 
Christ. The training was true and faithful for the time. But 
it was provisional and temporal, to be displaced by that which 
is complete and eternal. Did the sacrifice of children express 
the inerrant will of God for all men? Did the sacrifice of 

1 Rom. 121. 



THE TRUTHEULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 643 

animals express the inerrant word of God for all time ? By 
no means. These were the forms in which it was necessary to 
clothe the divine law of sacrifice in its earlier stages of revela- 
tion. These partial forms were the object lessons by which 
the little children of the ancient world could be trained to 
understand the final law of sacrifice for men. 

On the same principle we would explain the law of circum- 
cision, the law which prohibits the eating of swine and shell- 
fish, the laws of ceremonial uncleanness and purification, the 
laws of mixtures and the exclusion of eunuchs, bastards, and 
descendants of certain nations from the holy precincts. These 
religious laws doubtless were of immense benefit to Israel in 
his religious development. But they do not reflect truly and 
accurately and inerrantly the mind of God as to the way in 
which He would be everlastingly worshipped. He taught them 
to worship Him in the forms of which they were capable, in order 
to train them for the use of the highest forms when the proper 
time should arrive. The institutions of Israel were appropriate 
for the Old Testament dispensation, not for the Christian age. 
They have their propriety as elementary forms, but they err 
from the ideal of religion as it lies eternally . in the mind and 
will of God. Saint Paul calls them weak and beggarly rudi- 
ments,^ a shadow of the things to come.^ 

IV. Gradual Development in Morality 

We cannot defend the morals of the Old Testament at all 
points. It is not in accord with the morals of our day that a 
man who was a slaveholder, a polygamist, and who showed such 
little respect for truth as Abraham, should be called the friend 
of God. It is not to be reconciled with modern morality that 
a man who committed so much injustice and crime as David 
should be called the man after God's own heart. It would be 
impossible for modern writers to make such statements; and yet 
we should not judge too harshly. We should consider the men 
in the light of their times. Nowhere in the Old Testament 
are polygamy and slavery condemned. The time had not come 

1 Gal. 49. 2 Col. 217. 



644 STUDY or HOLY SCRIPTURE 

in the history of the world when they could be condemned. 
Is God responsible for the " twin relics of barbarism " because 
He did not condemn them, but on the contrary recognized them 
and restrained them in the Old Testament? These laws could 
hardly be inerrant. They err from the divine ideal in their 
morals. But the errors in moral precept were such as were 
necessary in order to educate Israel for a nobler time when 
Israel, as well as the Christian Church, would abhor slavery 
and polygamy as sins and crimes. 

The patriarchs were not truthful : their age seems to have 
had little apprehension of the principles of truth ; ^ and yet 
Abraham was faithful to God, and so faithful under tempta- 
tion and trial that he became the father of the faithful, and 
from that point of view the friend of God. David was a sinner ; 
but he was a penitent sinner, and showed such a devout attach- 
ment to the worship of God that his sins, though many, were 
all forgiven him. And his life as a whole exhibits such gener- 
osity, courage, variety of human affection and benevolence, 
such heroism and patience in suffering, such self-restraint and 
meekness in prosperity, such nobility and grandeur of charac- 
ter, that we must admire him and love him as one of the best 
of men ; and we are not surprised that the heart of God went 
out to him also. He must be regarded as a model of excellence 
when compared with other monarchs of his age. 

The commendation of Jael by the theophanic angel for the 
treacherous slaying of Sisera could not be condoned in our age, 
and it is not easy to understand how God could have com- 
mended it in any age. And yet it is only in accord with the 
spirit of revenge which breathes in the command to exterminate 
the Canaanites, which animates the imprecatory psalms, which 
is threaded into the story of Esther, and which stirred Nehe- 
miah in his arbitrary government of Jerusalem. Jesus Christ, 
praying for His enemies, lifts us into a different ethical world 
from that familiar to us in the Old Testament. We cannot 
regard these things in the Old Testament as inerrant in the 
light of the moral character of Jesus Christ and the character 
of God as He reveals Him. And yet we may well understand 

1 See p. 308. 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 645 

that the Old Testament times were not ripe for the higher 
revelation, and that God condescended to a partial revelation 
of His word and will, such as would guide His people in the 
right direction, with as steady and rapid a pace as they were 
capable of making. 

Jesus Christ teaches us the true principle by which we may 
judge the ethics of the Old Testament, when He repealed the 
Mosaic law of divorce, and said : " Moses for your hardness 
of heart suffered you to put away your wives : but from the 
beginning it hath not been so." ^ 

In other words, the Mosaic law of divorce was not in accord 
with the original institution of marriage, or with the real mind 
and will of God. In that law God condescended for a season 
to the hardness of heart of His people, and exacted of them 
only that which they were able to perform. The law was 
imperfect, temporary, to be repealed forever by the Messiah. 
So through all the stages of divine revelation laws were given, 
which were but the scaffolding of the temple of holiness, which 
were to serve their purpose in the preparatory discipline, but 
were to disappear forever when they had accomplished their 
purpose. The codes of law of the Old Testament have all 
been cast down by the Christian Church as the scaffolding of 
the old dispensation, with the single exception of the Ten 
Words ; and with reference to the fourth of these, the words 
of Jesus are our guide : " The sabbath was made for man, and 
not man for the sabbath." ^ Yov the eternal principles of 
morals we turn in the Old Testament rather to the psalmists, 
the sages, and the prophets ; we think of the true citizens of 
Zion of the Psalter ; ^ of the guest in the temple of wisdom 
of the book of Proverbs ; * of the righteous sufferer of the 
Psalms of humiliation,^ and of the great prophet of the exile ; ^ 
of the saintly Job triumphantly challenging and destroying 
every slander of his pharisaic accusers, and vindicating his 
integrity in a magnificent unfolding of ethical experience,^ 
which has no equal save in the Sermon on the Mount of Jesus 
Christ. 

1 Mt. 198. See pp. 440 seq. 2 Mk, 227. 3 pg. 15, 24. * Prov. 9. 

5 Ps. 22, 69. 6 Is. 40-66. ^ job 31. See pp. 422 seq. 



646 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 



V. Gradualness of Biblical Doctrike 

When, now, we come to the doctrinal teachings of the Old 
Testament we find less difficulty. Some of the doctrines of 
the Old Testament are inadequate and provisional. All of 
them are partial and incomplete. 

1. The doctrine of God in the Old Testament is magnifi- 
cent. The individuality of God is emphasized in the personal 
name Yahweh, which probably means " the One ever with His 
people." 1 The doctrine of the living God is so strongly 
asserted that it is far in advance of the faith of the Christian 
Church at the present day, which has been misled by scholastic 
dogmaticians into abstract conceptions of God. The attributes 
are so richly unfolded and comprehensively stated that there 
is little to be added to them in the New Testament. The doc- 
trine of creation is set forth in a great variety of beautiful 
poetical representations, which give in the aggregate a simpler 
and a fuller conception of creation than the ordinary doctrine 
of the theologians, who build on a prosaic and forced interpre- 
tation of the first and second chapters of Genesis. The doc- 
trine of providence is illustrated in a wonderful variety of 
historical incidents, lyric prayers, thanksgivings and medita- 
tions, sentences of proverbial experience, and prophetic teach- 
ing. The God of the Old Testament is commonly conceived 
as king and lord ; He was conceived as the father of nations 
and kings and His love as the love of Israel and the Davidic 
dynasty : but the " our Father " of the common people was 
not known until Jesus Christ ; the profound depths of the 
mercy of God in Jesus Christ was not yet manifest; the doctrine 
of the Holy Trinity was not yet ripe. There is an advance in 
God's revelation of Himself through the successive layers of 
the Old Testament writings which is like the march of an 
invincible king. 

It is true that there are at times representations of vindic- 
tiveness in God, a jealousy of other gods, a cruel disregard of 

1 See Robinson, Gesenius' Heb. Lex., new edition by Brown, Driver, and 

I>riggs, article ^\^T1''. 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 647 

human suffering and human life, an occasional vacillation and 
change of purpose, the passion of anger and arbitrary prefer- 
ences, which betray the inadequacy of ancient Israel to under- 
stand their God, and the errancy of their conceptions and 
representations. But we all know that the true God does not 
accord with these representations. We may call them anthro- 
pomorphisms and anthropopathisms ; but whatever we may 
name them they are errant representations. They do not, 
however, mar the grandeur of the true God as we see Him in 
the Old Testament. The truthfulness of the teaching of the 
doctrine of God is not destroyed by occasional inaccuracies of 
the teachers. 

2. The doctrine of man in the Old Testament is a noble 
doctrine. The unity and brotherhood of the race in origin and in 
destiny is taught in the Old Testament as nowhere else. The 
origin and development of sin are traced with a vividness and 
an accuracy of delineation that find a response in the experi- 
ences of mankind. The ideal of righteousness as the original 
plan of God for man and the ultimate destiny for man is held 
up as a banner throughout the Old Testament. Surely these 
are true instructions ; they are faithful, they are divine. There 
are doubtless dark strands of national prejudice, of pharisaical 
particularism, of faulty psychology, and of occasional exaggera- 
tion of the more external forms of ceremonial sin ; but these 
do not mar, they rather serve to magnify the golden strands 
which constitute the major part of the cord that binds our race 
into an organism created and governed by a holy God in the 
interests of a perfect and glorified humanity. 

3. The most characteristic doctrines of the Old Testament 
as well as the New Testament are the doctrines of redemption. 
These are so striking that they entitle us to regard Biblical 
History as essentially a history of redemption, and Biblical 
Literature as the literature of redemption.^ 

The redemption of the Bible embraces the whole man, body 
and soul, in this world and in the future state, the individual 
man and the race of man, the earth and the heavens. The 
biblical scheme of redemption is so vast, so comprehensive, so 

1 See pp. 547 seq. 



648 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

far-reaching that the Christian Church has thus far failed in 
apprehending it. The doctrine of redemption unfolds from 
simple germs into magnificent fruitage. The central nucleus 
of this redemption is the Messianic idea. This comprehends 
not only the person of the Messiah, but also a kingdom of 
redemption and the redemption itself. Man is to pursue the 
course of divine discipline until he attains the holiness of God. 
Israel is to be a kingdom of priests, a holy nation. All the 
world is to be incorporated as citizens of Zion. Zion is the 
light and joy of the entire earth. A Messianic king is to reign 
over all nations. A Messianic prophet is to be the redeemer 
of all. A priestly king is to rule in peace and righteousness 
a kingdom of priests. All evil is to be banished from nature 
and from man. The animal kingdom is to share in the uni- 
versal peace. The vegetable world is to respond in glad song 
to the call of man. There are to be new heavens and a new 
earth as well as a new Jerusalem from which all the evil will 
be excluded. Such ideals of redemption are divine ideals which 
the human race has not yet attained. But in the course of 
training for these ideals, the provisional redemption enjoyed 
in the experience of God's people is rich and full. Study the 
psalms of penitence, the psalms of faith and confidence in God, 
the thanksgivings and the Hallels, and where else will you find 
religious poetry which so aptly expresses the redemptive experi- 
ence of all the children of God ? 

It is quite true that forgiveness of sins was appropriated 
without any explanation of its grounds. The sacrifice of Cal- 
vary was unknown to the Old Testament as a ground of salva- 
tion. The mercy of God was the ultimate source of forgiveness. 
There is a lack of apprehension in the Old Testament of the 
righteousness of faith. It was Jesus Christ who first gave 
faith its unique place in the order of salvation. The doctrine 
of holy love, which is urged in Deuteronomy, Jeremiah, and 
the great prophet of the exile, is only a faint aspiration when 
compared with the breathings of the love of God to man, and 
man to God, as taught by Jesus and Saint Paul. 

The doctrine of the future life in the Old Testament is often 
obscured by questioning and doubts. It is only in the later 



THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 649 

stages that there is a joyous confidence in the enjoyment of the 
favour of God after death, and not till Daniel do we have a 
faith in a resurrection of some of the dead. "Jesus Christ 
abolished death, and brought life and incorruption to light 
through the Gospel."^ 

Thus in every department of doctrine the Old Testament is 
seen advancing through the centuries in the several periods of 
Biblical Literature, in the unfolding of all the doctrines, pre- 
paring the way for the full revelation in the New Testament. 
The imperfections, incompleteness, inadequacy of some of the 
statements of the Old Testament as to religion, morals, and 
doctrine necessarily inhere in the gradualness of the divine 
revelation. That revelation which looked only at the end, at 
the highest ideals, at what could be accomplished in the last 
century of human time, would not be a revelation for all men. 
It would be of no use to any other century but the last. A 
divine word for man must be appropriate for the present as 
well as the future ; must have something to guide men in every 
stage of religious advancement ; must have something for every 
century of history, — for the barbarian as well as the Greek, the 
Gentile as well as the Jew, the dark-minded African as well as 
the open-minded European, the dull Islander as well as the 
subtile Asiatic, the child and the peasant as well as the man 
and the sage. It is just in this respect that the Holy Script- 
ures of the Old and New Testaments are so preeminent. They 
have in them religious instruction for all the world. They 
trained Israel in every stage of his advancement, and so they 
will train all men in every step of their advancement. 

It does not harm the advanced student to look back upon the 
inadequate knowledge of his youthful days. It does not harm 
the Christian to see the many imperfections, crudities, and 
errors of the more elementary instruction of the Old Testa- 
ment. Nor does it destroy his faith in the truthfulness of the 
Divine Word in these elementary stages. He sees its appropri- 
ateness, its truthfulness, its adaptation, its propriety ; and he 
learns that an unerring eye and inerrant mind and infallible 
will has all the time been at work using the imperfect media, 

1 2 Tim. 110. 



650 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 

and straining them to their utmost capacity to guide men, to 
raise them, and advance them in the true religion. The sacred 
books are always pointing forward and upward; they are 
always expanding in all directions; they are now, as they 
always have been, true and faithful guides to God and a holy 
life. They are now, as they always have been, trustworthy 
and reliable in their religious instruction. They are now, as 
they always have been, altogether truthful in their testimony 
to the heart and experience of mankind. And this we may 
say with confidence, while at the same time with the apostle we 
exclaim standing on the heights of the New Testament Revela- 
tion in Jesus Christ: "Now we see in a mirror darkly; but 
then face to face : now I know in part ; but then shall I know 
fully even as also I have been fully known. "^ 

1 1 Cor. 1312. 



CHAPTER XXYI 

THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 

The essential principle of the Reformed system of theol- 
ogy is redemption by the divine grace alone. The Reformed 
churches have ever been distinguished for their intense in- 
terest in the covenant of grace. Sometimes the divine grace 
has been hardened by an undue stress upon the sovereignty 
of it, so that sovereignty has taken the place of the divine 
grace as the central principle of theology in some of the 
scholastic systems ; and sometimes the divine grace has been 
softened by an undue emphasis upon the Fatherhood of God. 
But even in these more extreme tendencies of Calvinism the 
essential principle of the divine grace alone has not been aban- 
doned, however little any of the systems have comprehended 
the richness and the fulness of the " grace of God that bringeth 
salvation." 1 

Redemption by the divine grace alone is the banner prin- 
ciple of the Reformed churches, designed to exclude the uncer- 
tainty and arbitrariness attached to all human instrumentalities 
and external agencies. As the banner principle of the Lu- 
theran Reformation was justification by faith alone excluding 
any merit or agency of human works, so the Calvinistic prin- 
ciple excluded any inherent ef&cacy, in human nature or in 
external remedies, for overcoming the guilt of sin and working 
redemption. In these two principles lie the chief merits and 
the chief defects of the two great churches of the Reformation. 
Intermediate between these principles of faith alone and grace 
alone, lies a third principle, which is the Divine Word alone. 
This principle has been emphasized in the Reformation of Great 
Britain and especially in the Puritan churches. The Word of 

1 Titus 211. 
651 



652 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

God has been called the formal principle of Protestantism over 
against faith alone, the material principle, and it has been said 
that the Reformed churches have laid more stress upon the 
formal principle, while the Lutheran churches have laid more 
stress upon the material principle. This does not, in our judg- 
ment, correspond with the facts of the case. Rather is it true 
that in the three great churches of the Reformation, the three 
principles, faith, grace, and the Divine Word, were empha- 
sized ; but these churches differed in the relative importance 
they ascribed to one of these three principles of the Reforma- 
tion in its relation to the other two. The Word of God is the 
intermediate principle where faith and grace meet. The Word 
of God gives faith its appropriate object. The Word of God 
is the appointed instrument or means of grace. 

I. The Gospel in Holy Scripture 

The Word of God as a means of grace, as a principle of the 
Reformation, has, however, its technical meaning. It is not 
the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, 
but rather the Gospel contained in the Scriptures : 

" The Holy Gospel which God Himself first revealed in Para- 
dise, afterwards proclaimed by the Holy Patriarchs and Prophets, 
and foreshadowed by the sacrifices and other ceremonies of the 
law and finally fulfilled by His well-beloved Son." ^ 

The merit of the Lutheran Reformation was that it so dis- 
tinctly set forth the means by which man appropriates the 
grace of the Gospel — by faith alone. Faith is the sole appro- 
priating instrument, and it becomes a test of the Word of God 
itself ; for faith having appropriated the gospel of the grace 
of God is enabled to determine therefrom what is the Word of 
God and what is not the Word of God. As Luther said : 

'^ All right holy books agree in this that they altogether preach 
and urge Christ. This also is the true touchstone to test all books, 
when one sees whether they so urge Christ or not, since every 
scripture shews Christ (Rom. 3^^), and Saint Paul will know noth- 
ing but Christ (1 Cor. 2~) ; what does not teach Christ that is not 

1 Heidelb. Cat., Quest. 19. 



THE HOLY SCEIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 653 

yet apostolical, even if Saint Paul or Saint Peter taught it ; on the 
other hand, what preaches Christ would be apostolical, even if 
Judas, Annas, Pilate, and Herod did it." ^ 

The merit of the Calvinistic Reformation is that it so dis- 
tinctly set forth the means by which God accomplishes human 
redemption — by the divine grace of the Gospel. The divine 
grace is the sole efficacious instrument of redemption, and this 
grace becomes itself a test of the true Word of God. The 
divine grace in the Scriptures gives its witness for the Script- 
ures, discriminating the true Canon from all other books. 

"We know these books to be canonical, and the sure rule of our 
faith not so much by the common accord and consent of the Church, 
as by the testimony and inward illumination of the Holy Spirit, 
which enables us to distinguish them from other ecclesiastical 
books, upon which, however useful, we cannot found any article 
of faith." 2 

It was the merit of the British Reformation from the begin- 
ning that it laid such stress on the Divine Word alone, and 
it was especially in the British churches that this principle 
received its fullest statement and development. Thus it was a 
cardinal principle of the Church of England that : 

"The Holy Scripture conteyneth all things necessary to salva- 
tion ; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved 
thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed 
as an article of faith, or be thought requisite as necessary to 
salvation. " ^ 

And the Westminster Confession states : 

" The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be 
believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any 
man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the 
Author thereof ; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the 
word of God."^ 

Thus the three principles of the Reformation were empha- 
sized variously in the three great branches of the Reformation. 
The most serious defect was in the failure of the respective 

1 Vorred. zu Epist. Jacobus ; Walch, XIV. p. 149. 

2 French Co7ifession, Art. IV. 3 Thirty-Nine Articles, Art. VI. 
* West. Conf., I. 4. 



654 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

churches properly to combine these principles, and especially in 
the neglect to define with sufficient care the relation of the 
divine grace and human faith to the Word of God. Hence 
the common error into which the churches of the Reformation 
soon fell, notwithstanding their symbols of faith, namely, the 
undue emphasis of the external Word of God over against the 
internal Word of God.^ The solution of this problem has been 
prepared for (a) by the exaltation of the Person of Jesus Christ 
more and more during the last century, as the central principle 
of theology. He is the Word of God in the Word of God, the 
eternal Logos. He is the veritable grace of the Gospel in 
whose person grace concentrates itself for the redemption of 
mankind. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His 
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not 
perish, but have everlasting life."^ 

(5) Another preparation is in the deeper understanding of 
the work of the Divine Spirit in the individual and in the 
Church. It is just in these two respects that the venerable 
mother of churches, the Roman Catholic communion, has its 
share in so great a work. For the Roman Catholic Church has 
ever emphasized the real presence of the Divine Spirit and of 
the Christ in the organism of the Church, and in all the insti- 
tutions of the Church. The Protestant churches in their zeal 
against limiting the work of Christ and His Spirit to the oper- 
ations of the Church, and in their efforts to maintain the inde- 
pendence of the Christ and His Spirit of any and every means 
of grace, have tended to depreciate the Church and its institu- 
tions, and so to lose sight of the real presence of the living, 
reigning Christ, and of the real presence of His Spirit in the 
Church and its institutions. The Roman Catholic Church and 
the Protestant Church have each their part to do in the 
reconciliation of all in a higher divine unity. 

II. The Grace of God in Holy Scripture 

The grace of God is the free, unmerited favour of God in 
redemption. That grace is bestowed upon men in Jesus Christ 

1 See pp. 621 seq. 2 john 316. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 655 

the Saviour. That grace is presented to us by the Holy Spirit, 
and applied by Him to our persons and lives. This application 
is made in the use of certain external media which are called 
the means of grace. "The Holy Ghost works faith in our 
hearts by the preaching of the holy Gospel, and confirms it by 
the use of the holy sacraments." ^ Thus the chief of these 
means of grace, according to the Reformed churches, is the 
Word of God, or the holy Gospel as contained in the Scriptures 
of the Old and New Testaments. 

1. In what sense are the Scriptures means of grace ? The 
Scriptures are means of grace in that they contain the Gospel 
of Christ which is the power of God unto salvation. The 
Word of God is called the sword of the Spirit. For it "is 
living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and 
piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints 
and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of 
the heart." 2 It is the lamp of God. "Thy word is a lamp 
unto my feet and a light unto my path. "^ It is the seed of 
regeneration. For Christians have "been begotten again, not 
of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the Word of 
God, which liveth and abideth."* It is the power of God. 
" For I am not ashamed of the gospel ; for it is the power of 
God unto salvation," ^ says Saint Paul to the Romans ; and he 
reminds his disciple, Timothy, that " from a babe thou hast 
known the sacred writings, which are able to make thee wise 
unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. "^ These 
attributes of the Word of God cannot be brought under the 
category of inspiration. The inspiration of the Word of God 
is a highly important doctrine, but it must not be so greatly 
emphasized as to lead us to neglect other and still more im- 
portant aspects of the Bible. Inspiration has to do with the 
truthfulness, reliability, accuracy, and authority of the Word of 
God; the assurance that we have that the instruction contained 
therein comes from God. But these attributes of the Divine 
Word that we have just mentioned in biblical terms are deeper 
and more important than inspiration. They lie at the root of 



1 Heidelb. Cat.. 


, Quest. 65. 


2 Heb. 412. 


3 Ps. 119105. 


4 1 Pet. 123. 




5 Rom. 116- 


6 2 Tim. 315. 



656 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

inspiration, as among its strongest evidences. They stand out 
as the most prominent features of the Gospel, independent of 
the doctrine of inspiration. They are features shared by the 
Bible with the Church and the sacraments, which are not 
inspired and are not infallible. They are those attributes that 
make the Bible what it is in the life of the people and the 
faith of the Church without raising the question of inspiration. 
They ascribe to the Word of God a divine power such as is 
contained in a seed of life, the movement of the light, the 
activity of a sword, a power that works redemption, the 
supreme means of grace. As Robert Boyle well says ; ^ 

"Certainly then, if we consider God as the Creator of our 
souls, and so likeliest to know the frame and springs and nature 
of his own workmanship, we shall make but little difficulty to 
believe that in the books written for and addressed to men, he 
hath employed very powerful and appropriated means to work 
upon them. And in effect, there is a strange movingness, and, if 
the epithet be not too bold, a kind of heavenly magic to be found 
in some passages of Scripture, which is to be found nowhere else.'' 

2. What, then, is this power of grace contained in the Script- 
ures ? The power of grace contained in the Scriptures is the re- 
demption made known to us, freely offered to us, and effectually 
applied to us in Jesus Christ the Saviour. It is the holy Gospel 
in the Scriptures, the Word of God written, presenting as in a 
mirror of wonderful combinations from so many different points 
of view, the glorious person, character, life, and achievements 
of the Word of God incarnate, the eternal Logos. Thus the 
Scriptures give us not merely the history of Israel, but the his- 
tory of redemption from its earliest protevangelium to its 
fruition in Jesus Christ, the Messiah of history and prophecy. 
They give us not ordinary biography, but the experience of 
redeemed men, telling us of their faith, repentance, spiritual 
conflicts, and the victories of grace. They give us the grand- 
est poetry of the world and the most sublime moral precepts ; ^ 
but this poetry is composed of the songs of the redeemed, and 
these precepts are the lessons of those who are wise in the fear 

1 Some Considerations touching the Style of the Holy Scriptures^ London, 
1661, p. 241. 2 See pp. 355 seq. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 657 

of God. They give us oratory ; ^ but the orations are pro- 
phetic, impassioned utterances of warning and comfort in view 
of the conflicts of the kingdom of grace and its ultimate tri- 
umph, and the preaching of the gospel of a risen and glorified 
Saviour. They give us essays and epistles ; ^ but these are not 
to enlighten us in the arts and sciences, the speculations of 
philosophy, and the maxims of commerce, that we may be 
students in any of the departments of human learning. They 
set forth Jesus Christ the Saviour, in whom are hid all the 
treasures of wisdom and knowledge. ^ Redemption is written 
all over the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The 
grace of God that bringeth salvation is the one all-pervading 
influence. This is the holy substance of the Bible to which all 
else is the human form in which it is enveloped. Hence the 
two great divisions of the Bible are called Testaments or Cov- 
enants, for they are covenants of grace, the great storehouses 
in which God has treasured up for all time and for all the 
world the riches of His grace of redemption. This grace of 
redemption contained in Jesus Christ and conveyed by the 
Scriptures is redemption from sin to holiness, from death in 
guilt to life in blessedness; it is a grace of regeneration and a 
grace of sanctification. 

(a) It is a grace of regeneration. Christians are begotten 
again, not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible, by the 
Word of God which liveth and abideth forever.* Jesus repre- 
sents His word as a seed of grain which He Himself plants in 
the human heart. It springs up in the good soil, first the 
blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear, and grows 
to maturity amidst all kinds of difficulties and dangers.^ It 
is a germ of life that imparts itself to man's heart and finds 
therein the prepared ground of its growth. The words of 
Jesus are spirit and life ; ^ they bear in them the regenerating 
force of the Divine Spirit to quicken the human spirit. The 
Gospel is no dead letter, it is a living organism ; for Christ 
Jesus is in it, in it all, and in every part of it, and the energy 
of the Divine Spirit pervades it, so that its words are endowed 

1 See pp. 338 seq. 2 See pp. 340 seq. ^ Col. 2K 

* 1 Pet. 123. 5 Mk. 4. 6 John 663. 

2u 



658 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

with the omnipotence of divine love and the irresistibleness of 
divine grace. Those brief, terse, mysterious, yet simple texts, 
spread all over the Bible, the inexhaustible supply for preachers 
and teachers, those little Bibles, that contain the quintessence 
of the whole — like the mountain lakes, clear yet reaching to 
vast depths, like the blue of the sky, charming yet leading to 
infinite heights — they lay hold of the sinner with the irresisti- 
ble conviction of his sin ; they persuade the penitent of the 
divine forgiveness ; they constrain faith by the energy of re- 
deeming love ; they assure the repenting of the adoption of the 
Heavenly Father. There are no other words like the words of 
God contained in the sacred Scriptures, in which the grace of 
God appropriates, moulds, and energizes the forms of human 
speech with creative, generative power. 

(5) The grace of redemption contained in the Scriptures is 
also sanctifying grace. Our Saviour prays the Fathw for His 
disciples : "Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth." ^ 
He tells His disciples, "Already ye are clean because of the 
word which I have spoken unto you."^ Xhe word of the 
Gospel is thus a cleansing, sanctifying word : for it is not bare 
truth appealing to the intellect with logical power, it is not 
truth clothed with beauty and charming the aesthetic nature 
of man ; but it is truth which is essentially ethical, having 
moral power, and above all . energized by the religious forces, 
which lay hold of the religious instincts of man, and it leads 
him to God. This could not be accomplished by the law of 
commandments contained in ordinances, but only by the Gospel 
of the grace of God, the soul-transforming words of our holy 
religion. For the Gospel sets forth God, the Holy Redeemer, 
the Father, and the Preserver. The Gospel sets forth Jesus 
Christ as the crucified, risen, and glorified Saviour ; presents 
us His blood and righteousness, throws over our nakedness the 
robe of His justification, and commands us and transforms us 
by the vision of His graces and perfections. The Word of 
God is a purifying and sanctifying word ; because it contains 
the words of holy men, of a sinless and entirely sanctified 
Saviour, of a perfect God, the Holy One of Israel. 

1 John 1717. 2 John IS*. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTUKE AS MEANS OF GRACE 659 

Human speech is a most wonderful endowment of man. 
It is the tower of strength in little children, who as babes and 
sucklings are enabled to praise their God.^ It is the means of 
communication between intelligent beings. It is the means of 
communication between God and man. Human speech finds 
its noblest employment by man in prayer, praise, adoration, 
and preaching of the Gospel of the grace of God. Human 
speech finds its highest employment by God in being made the 
instrument of His divine power. It enwraps and conveys to 
sinful man the divine grace of regeneration and sanctification ; 
it presents the Divine Trinity to man in all their redemptive 
offices ; and it is the channel of communication, of attachment, 
of communion, of organic union, and everlasting blessedness. 

" For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all 
men, instructing us, to the intent that, denying ungodliness and 
worldly lusts, we should live soberly and righteously and godly in 
this present world; looking for the blessed hope and appearing of 
the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ ; who gave 
himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and 
purify unto himself a people for his own possession, zealous of 
good works." ^ 

III. The Efficacy of Holy Scbipture 

The Holy Scriptures are means of grace, because they have 
in them the grace of God in Jesus Christ, the grace of regen- 
eration and sanctification. In what, then, lies the efficacy of 
this grace? How are we regenerated and sanctified by the 
word of redemption in Christ? 

"The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the 
preaching of the Word, an effectual means of enlightening, con- 
vincing, and humbling sinners, of driving them out of themselves, 
and drawing them unto Christ ; of conforming them to His image, 
and subduing them to His will; of strengthening them against 
temptations and corruptions ; of building them up in grace, and 
establishing their hearts in holiness and comfort through faith 
unto salvation." ^ 

These are faithful and noble words. They ought to become 
1 Ps. 82. 2 Titus 211-1^ 3 i^gsj. Larger Cat., Quest. 155. 



660 STUDY OE HOLY SCRIPTURE 

more real to the experience of the men of this generation, 
where the peril, on the one hand, is in laying* too much stress 
on doctrines of faith, and, on the other, in overrating maxims 
of morals. Religion, the experience of the divine grace and 
growth therein, is the chief thing in the use of the Bible and 
in Christian life. The Holy Scriptures are means of grace, but 
means that have to be applied by a divine force to make them 
efficacious. There must be an immediate contact and energetic 
working upon the readers and hearers and students of the 
Word by a divine power. The Word of God does not work 
ex Of ere operato^ that is, by its mere use. It is not the mere 
reading, the mere study of the Bible, that is efficacious. It is 
not the Bible in the house or in the hands. It is not the Bible 
read by the eyes and heard by the ears. It is not the Bible 
committed to memory and recited word for word. It is not the 
Bible expounded by the teacher and apprehended by the mind 
of the scholar. All these are but external forms of the Word 
w-hich enwrap the spiritual substance, the grace of redemption. 
The casket contains the precious jewels. It must be opened 
that their lustre and beauty may charm us. The shell contains 
the nut. It must be cracked or we cannot eat it. The pitcher 
contains the water. But it must be poured out and drunk to 
satisfy thirst. The Word of God is effectual only when it has 
become dynamic, and has wrought vital and organic changes, 
entering into the depths of the heart, assimilating itself to the 
spiritual necessities of our nature, transforming life and char- 
acter. This is the purpose of the grace which the Bible con- 
tains. This is the power of grace that the Bible exhibits, in 
holding forth to us Jesus Christ the Saviour. This can be 
accomplished in us only by the activity of the Holy Spirit 
working in and through the Scriptures in their use. 

IV. The Appropriatiok of the Grace of Holy 
Scripture 

How, then, are we to obtain the grace of God contained in 
the Scriptures and effectually applied unto us by the Holy 
Spirit as regenerating and sanctifying grace? The universal 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 661 

Protestant answer to this question would be, the grace of the 
Scriptures is received by faith. Faith is the hand of the soul 
which grasps and takes to itself the grace of God. But the 
nature of this appropriation by faith needs unfolding. The 
Westminster Shorter Catechism ^ gives a good answer to the 
question : 

"That the Word may become effectual to salvation, we must 
attend thereunto with diligence, preparation and prayer ; receive 
it with faith and love, lay it up in our hearts, and practise it in 
our lives." 

1. The first thing we have to do in our study of the Word 
of God is to give it our attention. Indeed attention is the first 
requisite of all study and of all work. Diligence and prepara- 
tion are necessary for all undertakings. No one can fulfil his 
calling in life without these qualifications. But there is an 
attention to be given to the Word of God which is peculiar, 
and vastly higher than the attention given to ordinary avoca- 
tions of life. It is an attention that is distinguished by prayer ; 
for the study of the Bible is a study of redemption, a search 
for the power of God in Jesus Christ, a quest for the grace of 
salvation. Such study must be pointed with prayer, for prayer 
is the soul's quest after God. Prayer directs the student of 
the Bible to God in the Bible. It withdraws the attention 
from all other things that might absorb and attract it, and 
concentrates it on God. Prayer is the arrow-head that bears 
the arrow of attention to its mark — God. If the grace of 
God in the sacred Scriptures, the prevenient grace, — always 
preceding and anticipating the quest of man, ready to be found, 
waiting to impart itself to us, — be directed by the Holy Spirit, 
then the attention of the Bible student, directed by prayer, 
comes in immediate contact w^ith this Spirit of grace and 
receives the power of salvation in personal union with Him. 
Hence it is that prayer is associated with the Word of God 
and the sacraments as a means of grace. It is not a means 
of grace in the same way as the Word of God, but it is a means 
of grace of no less importance ; for if the Word of God is the 

1 Ques. 90. 



662 STUDY OF HOLY SCKIPTURE 

instrument, the means by which the grace of God is given to 
us by the Holy Spirit, prayer is the instrument or means of 
grace whereby we are able to receive and use the grace of God. 
It is of prime importance, therefore, that the student of the 
Bible should be bathed in prayer, and that the spirit of prayer 
should be the animating influence in all our investigations 
of the Scriptures. Prayerful attention seeks and finds God, 
appropriates His grace and the redemptive influence of His 
Word. 

Kobert Boyle well says : 

"And surely this consideration of the Bible's being one of the 
conduit pipes, through which God hath appointed to conveigh his 
Truth, as well as graces to his children, should methinks both 
largely animate us to the searching of the Scriptures, and equally 
refresh us in it. For as no Instrument is weak in an omnipotent 
hand: so ought no means to be looked upon as more promising 
than that which is like to be prospered by Grace, as 'tis devised by 
Omniscience. We may confidently expect God's blessing upon his 
own institutions, since we know that whatsoever we ask according 
to the will of God, he will give it us, and we can scarce ask any- 
thing more agreeable to the will of God, than the competent under- 
standing of that book wherein his will is contained."^ 

In order to emphasize this all-important point and give it its 
proper position in biblical study, it will be necessary for us to 
make some discriminations. 

(a) The first work in the scientific and systematic study of 
the Scriptures is called Textual Criticism, or the Lower Criti- 
cism. It is, first of all, necessary to know the text in which 
the Scriptures are contained. Hence the candidates for the 
ministry devote a large portion of their time to a study of the 
sacred languages, in order that they may undertake the work 
of Textual Criticism and study the various versions and manu- 
scripts of the Word of God. All translations must be derived 
from a faithful study of the originals. It is indispensable that 
a living Church should have a ministry who are brought into 
immediate contact with the divine originals. The Bible in un- 
known tongues is a Paradise fenced and barred.^ The acquisi- 

1 Some Considerations touching the Style of the Holy Scriptures. London, 
1661, p. 50. '^ See Chaps. IIL, XIX. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OE GRACE 663 

tion of the original text removes the barrier ; the translation 
into the tongue of the people opens the gates, that all who will 
may enter in. Hence Protestant churches have made it an 
article of faith that the Bible must be given to the people in 
their own tongue, and continually interpreted to the people by 
ministers, who know themselves the originals, and are able to 
remove misapprehensions that will always arise, to some extent, 
in connection with all translations and reproductions. But this 
first step of the mastery of the divine original text may be ac- 
complished, and yet the grace of God that is in the Scriptures 
remain entirely unknown. It is as if a man should enter the 
king's garden and devote his entire attention to the study of 
the gates and walls. 

(5) The second step in biblical study is literary criticism or 
Higher Criticism. ^ The sacred Scriptures are composed of a 
great variety of writings of different authors in different periods 
of history, writing in many different styles, such as poetr}^ and 
prose, history and story, epistle and prophecy. Some of this 
literature is exceedingly choice from a purely literary point of 
view. An anthology of the choicest pieces of biblical litera- 
ture would certainly be a very profitable study for many of 
God's people. Their eyes would be opened to the wondrous 
forms of beauty in which God has chosen to reveal His grace 
of redemption. But to study the Bible as sacred literature is 
not to study it as a means of grace. Exclusive devotion to 
that theme is as if we should enter the king's garden, and 
instead of going at once to his gracious presence, in accordance 
with his invitation, we should devote ourselves to the beautiful 
trees and flowers and ornamental shrubs and landscape. 

(c) The third work of biblical study is biblical exegesis. ^ 
In this department the student in every way endeavours to get 
at the true meaning of the Scriptures. The particular passage 
and the entire writing under consideration must be studied 
with the most minute accuracy, and, at the same time, the 
most comprehensive summation of evidence. But even this 
may be carried on in a most thorough and successful manner 
in all its stages, except the last and highest,^ without finding 

1 See Chaps. XI.-XVII. 2 See Chaps. III., XIX., pp. 474 seq. » See pp. 484 seq. 



664 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

God in Jesus Christ. Some of the best exegetes have not been 
true Christians. The peril in exegesis is, the becoming absorbed 
in details, and in giving ourselves to the quest after truth and 
scholarly accuracy. It is as if one entered the king's garden 
and devoted himself at once to a scientific examination and 
classification of its contents, the survey and mapping out of 
its sections, 

(6?) The fourth work of biblical study is the study of the 
history and theology of the Bible, ^ — its history, its religion, its 
doctrines, and its morals. This is the highest attainment of 
biblical scholarship, but it is not the study of the Bible as a 
means of grace. It is as if we entered the king's palace and 
devoted our attention to the principles and maxims of his 
administration, the rules of his household, while the king him- 
self was graciously waiting to receive us into his own presence 
and give us the kiss of fatherly salutation. 

All of these various subjects of biblical study are vastly 
important. The Church has not yet awakened to the vast 
possibilities and the wonderful fruitage to be derived from 
biblical study. No one could exalt these departments, each 
and all of them, more highly than I am disposed to do ; but 
notwithstanding, it must be said that if all these studies were 
to be accomplished in a most scholarly manner, the chief thing, 
the one supreme thing, might still remain unaccomplished — 
namely, the study of the Bible as a means of grace. This is 
the highest achievement of biblical study. For prayer will 
seek first the presence and the person of God. It will not be 
detained by anything in the Bible. It will press on through the 
text, the literature, the exegesis, the history, and the theology, 
giving them but slight attention, a mere passing glance, firmly 
advancing into the presence-chamber of God. It will run in the 
footsteps of the Divine Spirit, until the man is ushered into 
the presence of the Heavenly Father, and bows in adoration 
and love to the dear Saviour, and has the adoption and recogni- 
tion of sonship. Then first will he be assured that the Bible 
is indeed the Word of God, the inspired Canon, when he has 
found God in the Bible ; ^ then first will he understand the 

1 See Chaps. XX.-XXIII. 2 See Chap. VI. pp. 166 seq. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OE GRACE 665 

Scriptures at their centre, in their very heart, when he has 
recognized his Saviour in them ; ^ then in the light of the 
Redeemer's countenance, the student may go forth to the 
enjoyment of all the beauties and glories and wondrous mani- 
festations of truth and love in the Scriptures, and find them 
radiant with the love of Christ, and pervaded throughout with 
the effectual grace of God. As an ancient Puritan divine has 
said : 

" Thus in the Scriptures ye find life, because the Word is so 
effectual to doe you good, to convert your soul, to pull down 
Satan's throne, and to build up the soul in grace. It is a hammer 
to break the hard heart, a fire to purge the drossie heart, a light 
to shine into the darke heart, an oyle to revive the broken heart, 
armour of proof to stablish the weake and tempted heart. If 
these precious things be matters of Christian religion ; then surely 
the written word is the foundation of it. Eternal life is in the 
Scriptures, because they testify of Christ, they set forth Christ 
who is the way, the truth and the life; in them ye find life, 
because in them ye find Christ. So far as by Scripture we get 
acquaintance with Christ ; so far we are acquainted with salvation 
and no farther. Eor if you knew all Histories and all the prophe- 
cies, if ye had the whole Bible by heart, if by it you could judge 
of all disputes, yet until you find Christ there, you cannot find 
life; the Scriptures are to us salvificall because they bring us 
unto Christ." ^ 

2. Faith in the form of prayerful attention and investiga- 
tion is followed by appropriating faith. The attention becomes 
more and more absorbed in its object. Prayer having attained 
its quest is satisfied and grateful. The grace of God, so evi- 
dently set forth in the Scriptures in Jesus Christ the Saviour, 
is appropriated in this personal contact. The affections are 
generated, and impart to faith new vigour. The Holy Spirit 
grasps the hand of prayer, and pours into it the treasures of 
grace, and they are clasped as infinitely precious to believing 
and loving hearts. As a distinguished modern divine says : 

"Holy Scripture gives faith its object. It puts Christianity in 
its purity and attractiveness before our eyes as an object which is 

1 See p. 485. 

2 Lyford, Plain Mail's Senses exercised, 1655, pp. 59, 60. 



666 STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 

itself a challenge and inducement to enter into union with it by 
faith.'^ ... " The Holy Spirit perpetually glorifies Christ as He 
is set forth in Scripture, makes Him emerge, so to speak, from 
the letter and stand out in living form before us. He thus 
brings us through the medium of Holy Scripture into communion 
with the living Christ." ^ 

Thus faith and love are the two eyes of the soul that see the 
living Christ present in His Word. They are the spiritual 
appetites by vrhich we partake of the bread of heaven and 
living water. Such a receiving is an ever-increasing enjoy- 
ment of the infinite riches of divine grace, the inexhaustible 
treasures of redemptive love. The supply of grace in the 
Scriptures is inexhaustible. The possibilities of the growth 
of the affections of faith and love are only limited by the pos- 
sibilities of grace itself. This system of grace is compared by 
the prophet Zechariah to a vast, self -feeding lamp-stand with 
its seven branches and lighted lamps, supplied by the ever- 
living, growing, and oil-producing olive-trees that stand by its 
sides and overshadow it.^ The oil of grace is ever fresh and 
new — the light is ever bright and brilliant. Faith's eye sees 
and understands it more and more. 

But just here it is necessary to guard against a too common 
error. It is true that the grace of God pervades the Scriptures, 
and Christ is the master of the Scriptures, but it is not equally 
easy for faith to see and appreciate the grace of God in every 
passage. The Bible contains supplies of grace for all the world, 
and for all time, for the weak and baby Christians, for the 
strong and manly Christians, for the immature Christian centu- 
ries, and for the Church in its highest development as the 
Bride of the Lamb. Training in the school of grace is indis- 
pensable for the appropriation of the grace of the Scriptures. 
There are but few who are able to appropriate more than the 
grace that lies on the surface of the plainest passages of Script- 
ure. The Church is constantly learning new lessons of grace 
from the Scriptures. We have a right to expect still greater 
light to break forth from the Scriptures when the Church has 

1 Dorner, System of Christian Doctrine, IV. pp. 260, 261. 
a Zech. 4. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 667 

been prepared to receive it. The Church did not attain its 
maturity at the Nicene Council. Augustine was not the high- 
est achievement of Christian faith and experience. The Prot- 
estant Reformation did not introduce the golden age. A 
church that is not growing in grace is a lukewarm, if not a 
dead, church. A theology that is not progressive is a bed- 
ridden, if not a dead, theology. The Church needs a greater 
Reformation than it has ever yet enjoyed — a more extensive 
living in the Holy Spirit, a deeper quickening, a more intense 
devotion in love and service to our Saviour and the interests 
of His kingdom. We are convinced that the seeds of such 
a Reformation are embedded in the Bible, only waiting a new 
springtime of the world to shoot forth. The grace of God 
will reveal itself to another Luther and another Calvin at 
no very distant day, in vastly greater richness and fulness, for 
the sanctification of the Church and the preparation of the 
Bride for her Bridegroom. In the meantime it behooves us 
all to turn away from the abnormal, immature, and defective 
experiences and systems of very poor Christians, so often held 
up to us as models for our attainment, and to set our faces as 
a flint against every wresting of Scripture in the interest of 
any dogma, new or old, and to fix our faith and love upon the 
image of the grace of God in Jesus Christ, the crucified, risen, 
and glorified Redeemer. He is the one object that concentrates 
the grace of God — the fountain source of supply for all be- 
lievers. Into His image as the divine likeness we are to be 
transformed, and we ought to think of no other. 

The Scriptures are indeed means, not ends. They are to 
bring us to God, to assimilate us to Christ, to unite us in 
organic union with Him. If this has not been accomplished, 
there has been very great failure, however much we may have 
accomplished in biblical scholarship or Dogmatic Theology, 
in the history and polity of the Church, in devotional read- 
ing and preaching, in the application of particular passages 
to our souls. But those who have become personally attached 
to Jesus Christ have found the Master of the Scriptures. He 
is the key to its treasures, the clue to its labyrinths. Under 
His instruction and guidance believers search the Scriptures 



668 STUDY or holy scripture 

with ever-increasing pleasure and profit. They ever find treas- 
ures new and old. They understand the secret of grace. 
They know how to extract it from the varied forms in which 
it is enveloped. They explore the deepest mines and bring 
forth lustrous gems of truth. They climb the highest peaks 
and rapturously gaze on the vast territories of their Lord. 
With the Psalmist they exclaim ; 

how I love thy instruction ! — it is my meditation all the day. 

How sweet are thy words unto my taste ! — sweeter than honey to my mouth ! 

1 love thy commandments above gold, — yea above fine gold. 

The sum of thy word is truth, — and everlasting all thy righteous judgments, i 

3. The grace of God in Holy Scripture can be fully appro- 
priated only by practising faith. Our Saviour taught His dis- 
ciples : "If any man willeth to do His will, he shall know of 
the teaching, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from 
myself. "2 Experiment is ever the victor of doubt. Faith is 
tested by practice. Abraham's faith was proved by his will- 
ingness to sacrifice his well-beloved son. Mere faith is seem- 
ing faith, a shadow, a dead vanity. A real, genuine, living 
faith apprehends and uses divine grace. The grace of God is 
effectual. It is dynamic in its application of redemption. It 
is no less dynamic after it has been appropriated by man. The 
light of the world lights up Christian lamps. The water of life 
becomes in the believer a fountain, from which shall flow rivers 
of living water. ^ The grace of God is made effectual by "lay- 
ing it up in our hearts and practising it in our lives." The 
grace of God becomes a grace of experience. Unless the divine 
grace continue to flow forth from a man in his life and conduct, 
the source of supply is stopped. A reservoir which has no out- 
let will have no incoming waters. A lamp that does not burn 
will not be able to receive fresh supplies of oil. 

From this two things follow : 

(a) If a Christian man would use the Scriptures as a means 
of grace, he must continually put them in practice in his heart 
and life. If the Church would apprehend more and more the 
riches of the grace of Jesus Christ contained in the Scriptures, 

1 Ps. 11997. 103. 127. 160. 2 John 717. 3 John 738. 



THE HOLY SCRIPTURE AS MEANS OF GRACE 669 

it must become a more practical, earnest, Christ-like Church. 
The source of supply from the reservoir Scripture is feeble 
because the outflowing of grace from Christian men and women 
is feeble. 

(5) Christians become secondary sources of supply. The 
Word of God, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when appropriated 
by the Christian, assimilated to his needs, transformed into his 
life, does not cease to be the Gospel of the grace of God. The 
external form has been changed, but the internal substance of 
grace is the same. The Word of God does not cease to be the 
Word of God when wrapped in other than Scripture language. 
Hence it is that the Christian becomes a living epistle of God,^ 
and the Church, as a body of such epistles, a means of grace, 
conveying the divine grace in another form to the world. It 
is ever the grace of God that is the effectual divine force, and 
not the form in which for the time it may be enveloped. 
Happy the Church when its ministers have become more really 
such living epistles, written with the Spirit of the living God ! 
Blessed will that time be, when the entire membership of the 
Church shall become such epistles, when Christ, who so loved 
the Church and gave Himself for it, shall have sanctified it, 
having cleansed it by the washing of water with the Word ! 2 
Then will the ancient prophecy be reafeed-^ 

Lo, days are coming, is the utterance of Yahweli, 

When I will conclude with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, 
a new covenant ; 

Not according to the covenant that I concluded with their fathers 

In the day of my strengthening their hand to bring them forth from the land 
of Egypt ; 

Which covenant with me they did break, although I was lord over them, is 
the utterance of Yahweh. 

For this is the covenant that I will conclude with the house of Israel after 
those days, is the utterance of Yahweh : 

I do put my instruction within them, and upon their heart will I write it ; 

And I will become a God for them, and they will become a people for me ; 

And they will not teach any more, each his friend, and each his brother, say- 
ing, "Know Yahweh " ; 

For all of them will know me, from the least even to the greatest of them, is 
the utterance of Yahweh. 

For I will pardon their iniquity, and their sins I will not remember any 
more. * 

1 2 Cor. 33. 2 Eph. 525-26. 3 Heb. Sio-u, ^ Jer. Sl^i-s*. 



INDEX OF TEXTS 

The large-faced type indicates the most important references, especially where there 
is criticism of the text or exposition. 



Pentateuch 


: 189 


, 211, 234, 


Genesis : 






Leviticus : 




235, 247, 


252, 


253. 257- 


Xlii28 




298 


ixi 


174 


258, 269-271, 


274, 275, 


xliii26 




182 


xii3 


269 


277, 282, 


283, 


287, 290, 


xlivl8-34 




338 


xiv 


269 


319, 322-323, 


329 


Xlv26 




298 


xviii2i 


174 








xlYiiii5-i6 


394 


559 


xixis 


444 


Genesis : 




234, 278 


xlviiii9 


390 


.559 


Xx2-5 


174 




550-551, 560 


xlix2-27 




559 


XXivl7 


562 


13 




551 


xlixio 


238 seq. 






iiMv 




547, 559 


121 




298 


Numbers : 


234 


ii8 seq. 




4i5 








iii39 


177 


ii24 




4il 


Exodus : 




234 


VJ24-26 


338, 403, 560 


iv23 




356 


iii 




174 


ixio 


177 


V 




512 


iii^ 




439 


1x15 


625 


vil-4 




333 


iv20 




528 


X35 


174 


vi-viii 




560 


iv21 




298 


x35-36 


177, 387, 559 


ix25-27 




396 


iv22 




356 


xii5 


178 


Xi3 




182 


iv26 




269 


X116-8 


559 


xiii-3 




559 


Vii23 




298 


Xiil2 


178 


xiii4 




53 


X27 




298 


XX 


529 


xiv 




52 


xii44-48 




269 


xxi 


356 


Xivl9 




391 


xiv^ 




298 


XXll4 


355 


xivl9-20 




560 


XV 298, 356, 


362, 


379- 


xxli^is 


659 


XV6 




444 


380, 415, 559 




XXll7 


356 


xvis 




177 


XV4 




621 


yyi 17-18 


390, 559 


xviiis 




177 


x^di 




529 


XX127-30 


413, 569 


xviii^ 




177 


x^iiis 




559 


xxi30 


177 


xviii22 




178 


xix 




446 


Xxlil^se?. 


378 


xix^s 




439 


xix5 




356 


xxllv-10 


569 


Xix33 




177 


xix3-6 




559 


XXiiil8-24 


378, 659 


Xx5-6 




298 


XX 




118 


XXiv3-9 


559 


xxi6-" 




393, 559 


XX12 




268 


xxivi3 


298 


xxii 




443, 641 


XX13-14 




444 


XXlvl5-24 


559 


xxiii* 




297 


xx23-xxiii 




119 


Txix^s 


177 


xxiv55 




177 


xxii7 




268 


xxxi2 


177 


xxivso 




387, 559 


Xxi37-XXu3 




662 






XXV28 




390, 559 


Xxiii20-23 




302 


Deuteronomy : 234, 303, 324 


xxvii2 




182 


xxiyS 




176 


18 


440 


XXvii2r-29 




559 


xxivi'' 




444 


ivii 


298 


xxvii3*-40 




394, 559 


xxxiv 




119 


ivl5-19 


638 


xxviiii-4 




560 


XXXiv29^5 




444 


V 


118 


xxxi2o 




298 


Xl35 


524-625 


viii3 


14 


XXTi26 




298 








xi? 


55 


xxxiii^ 




177 


Leviticus : 




234 


Xii3 


562 


XXXYiil2 




177 


Vii27 




561 


xili 


542 



671 



672 



INDEX OF TEXTS 



Deuteronom 


y- 






Ruth: 








1 Kings : 




Xviiil8-19 






270 


iiii 






177 


xviii27 


546 


xxii5 






561 


iil2 


304-305 


343 


xviii39 


546 


xxiiii 






344 


iiiS 






177 


xix 


174 


xxiii3 






343 


iiil2 






177 


xix8 


521 


xxivi^ 






269 


iiil7 






177 






XXV* 






444 


ivl7-22 






314 


2 Kings : 




xxyS 






439 










ylS 


177 


xxviii27 






178 


1 Samuel: 


173, 


189, 


252, 


Vi25 


178 


xxviii30 






178 


255, 297 


319, 


330 




X27 


178 


xxviii65 






298 


ii 






298 


Xiv25 


345 


xxix3 






298 


iii-io 






559 


xviiiii 


61 


xxixs 






297 


ii3 






55 


xviii2'' 


178 


xxixis 






298 


iiil3 






178 


xix21-34 


560 


Xxix28 






177 


V6 






178 


Xix35 


520 


xxxii297, 


362-363 


398, 


vi4 






178 


xxii-xxiii 


119 


400, 415 


559 






xiis 






559 


xxiiiio 


174 


xxTii8-9 






534 


XV 






338 






XXXii21 






305 


XV22-23, 29, 38 




559 


1 Chronicles : 127 


, 130, 132, 


XXXii49, 52 






297 


Xvil-13 






558 


137, 138, 164, 


173, 211, 


xxxiii 






559 


xvi'' 






559 


252, 253, 261 


274, 275, 


xxxiii27 






176 


Xvil4-23 






336 


287, 297, 298, 


319, 326, 










xviii-xviiis 


336 


558 


327, 329, 513 




Joshua: 189, 252, 


253, 


xvii^ 






558 


ii34-41 


514 


282, 319, 330. 






xviii3-36, 


45-47 




559 


iv3i-4i 


514 


ii 






443 


xviii'' 




385 


,559 


viii33-40 


514 


xii-14 






337 


xxivis 






559 


xiis 


391, 560 


Xl2-14 


356, 


392 


560 


xxivis 






560 


xiiis 356 


, 393, 560 


Xl3 






355 










Xvi8-36 


560 


xi2o 






298 


2 Samuel : 








Xvi40 


117 


xiv8 






298 


118 




355 


,356 


xviii 


297 


xxiv 






338 


ii9-27 66, 380, 413 


,560 


XX5 


558 


Xxiv23 






298 


iii33-34 


356, 390 


,560 


xxiv-xxviii 


514 










Vii2 






297 


XXVii25-31 


514 


Judges: 127 


252 


,297 


319, 


viill-16 






560 






330 








viii3 






177 


2 Chronicles : 




V 56,297 


,298 


,356 


380, 


Xi21 






173 


Xl6 


178 


398, 659. 








Xiil4 






178 


xxxiv-xxxv 


119 


yll 




66 


,366 


xvii2 






178 


xxxivis 


117 


Vl5-16 






376 


Xvi23 






177 


XXXV26 


117 


y23-27 






368 


Xix20 






177 






ix 






338 


xxi 






178 


Ezra: 127, 130, 


131, 137, 


ix7-15 


416-417 


,559 


XXil9 






558 


138, 164, 173, 


212, 252, 


xi« 






356 


xxii 23, 412-413 


,560 


255, 261, 274, 


287, 298, 


xiv 




334 


,356 


xxiis 






91 


319, 327, 329, 340 


xivi2 






356 


xxiiii 






91 


vii9 


553 


Xivl4, 18 




416 


,559 


XXiiil-7 




402 


,560 


viiio 


117 


Xvl-8a 






334 


xxiiis 






173 


viiiis 


553 


Xv8b-19 






334 














Xvl6 




416 


,559 


1 Kings : 


252-253, 


274, 


Nehemiah: 131, 


137, 138, 


xvi 






334 


275, 287, 


297, 


319, 


326, 


164, 173, 274, 


287, 298, 


Xvi24 






559 


330 








319, 327, 329, 340 


Xviii30 






177 


iv31-33 






355 


16 


297 


xxii9 






356 


yiiilO-11 
Viiil2-13 






525 
560 


ii8, 18 
viii-x 


553 

120 


Ruth: 126, 


128, 


131, 


164, 


X 






356 


viii8 63, 117, 436 


173, 234, 252, 


262, 


298, 


Xi2 






174 


x29-30 


117 


310, 319, 342, 343 




xiiie 






178 


x35-37 


117 


il6 






343 


xviii 






338 


xiii23-26 


344 



INDEX OF TEXTS 



673 



Esther : 102, 126 


,127 


128, 


Psalms : 




Psalms : 






130, 131, 


137, 


138, 


139, 


xivi-^ 


444 


xcl 




297 


141, 143, 


164, 


195, 


212 


XV 


645 


xcl* 




305 


234, 252, 


253, 


254, 


255^ 


xvi 


380 


xcv^'-s 




263 


261, 274, 


297, 


298, 


310, 


Xvi8-ll 


262 


xcviiii 




66 


319, 349 seq. 






xviii 23, 


362-363, 412- 


civ 297 


,298, 


411,551 










413, 560 




cv 




373-374 


Job : 126, 127, 129, 138 


,160, 


xviiio 


91 


CV120 




178 


164, 173, 


211, 


249, 


252, 


xviii5-7 


305 


CVil23-29 




177 


255, 261 


274, 


287, 


298, 


xviiiii 


91 


Clx8 




262, 443 


300, 301 


310, 


319, 


362, 


xxii-2 


366 


CX 


264 


, 303, 375 


363 








xxii 


297, 645 


cxi 




262 


15 






308 


xxiiio 


240 


cxi 




56, 377 


iiis 






557 


xxiii 


384 


cxU 




56, 378 


iii9 






557 


xxiv 


645 


cxvlU 




406-407 


Vii20 






178 


xxiv^-io 


419 


CXVilll2, 15 




243 


ix9 






557 


XXV 


242 


CXVlil22-23 




439 


ixl3 






557 


XXVl4 


29 


cxlx 


56 


, 381, 382 


xviiii* 






557 


xxxi2 


243 


CXlx97, 103, 


105, 127 


. 160 668 


xxi22 






556 


XXXi23 


305 


cxlxios 




605 


XXV2 






556 


xxxiii-2 


262, 444 


cxx-cxxxiv 


367 


xxvi6 






557 


xxxiii 


551 


cxxl 




368 


xxvii2 






557 


xxxiv 


56, 400 


cxxxix 




303 


xxviii22 






557 


Trxxv26-28 


304 


CXXXlx7-10 




348 


XXviii28 






29 


xxxvii 


444 


CXl3 




444 


xxxijg 






178 


xxxvi^ 


177 


CX114 




243 


xxxvii 




422^24 


xxxvii 


56, 383, 400 


cxli 




297 


xxxviii 






551 


xxxixi3 


297 


cxlllP 




243 


xxxvni-jfvxix 




301 


X114-18 


304 


cxliv2 




243 


xxxviiiis. 


15 




177 


xlii-xliii 


410-411 


cxlv 




56, 383 


xxxviiii^ 






557 


xliis 


395 


cxlviii7-8 




366 


xxxviii^i 






557 


xlv 


380, 413 








Xll5_xli34 






301 


xlvi 297, 


380, 403-404 


Proverbs : 


126, 


127, 129, 


xliis 






557 


1 


297 


160, 164, 


173, 


189, 212, 


xlii2 






273 


li 


308 


252-253, 


[274, 


277, 287, 










1113 


303 


297,298,320,321 


Psalms : 160, 164 


,173 


,211, 


1111 


23 


1-lx 


307, 398, 417 


247, 250, 


252, 


253, 


261, 


Ivill 


380 


vlio 




418 


262, 274, 


277, 


287, 


298, 


Ixvii 


402-403 


vUi 




551 


312, 313 


316 


319, 321, 


lxvii8 


243 


villi'' 




29 


322 








Ixvili 


510 


ix 




411, 645 


i 






380 


Ixviilis 


243 


1x1 




174 


ii 






303 


lxvlil26 


177 


1x10 




55 


iil-2 






262 


Ixix 


645 


X-XXill6 




388 


iii 






401 


1x1x2 


305 


xi 




366 


iv 






380 


1x1x22-23 


262 


xi-^ 




386 


V9 






444 


1x1x25 


443 


Xl25 




385 


vi 






374 


1x1x26 


262 


X11124 




386 


vii 






380 


Ixx 


304 


xlvio 




385 


viii 




407-408 


Ixxii^ 


243 


Xlv2' 




387 


viii2 






659 


1XX13 


240 


XV3 




387 


ix 






377 


lxxlli7 


239 


XV23 




385 


ix-x 






56 


Ixxvlli 


298 


XVl9 




386 


x3 






178 


lxxvllii--2i 


34 


XX1117-24 




391 


X7 






444 


lxxlx2-3 


129 


XXii22-23 




391 


xii 






243 


Ixxx 


413 


XX1124-25 




391 


xii 






380 


1XXX14 


177 


xxll2fr-2r 




391 


xiii 






380 


Ixxxvii 


538 


Xxli29 




388, 389 


xiv 


2 


X 


23 


xc 


298, 415 


xxliii-3 




395 



674 



INDEX or TEXTS 



Proverbs : 






Song of Songs 


126, 


127, 


Isaiah: * 






xxiii4-5 




393 


128, 130, 131 


, 141, 


143, 


1x1 




438 


XXiii6-8 




396 


164, 234, 252, 


253, 


255, 


1x11 




303 


xxiiiio-11 




391 


261, 278, 287 


, 297, 


298, 


1x11-2 




267 


XXiiil3-18 




391 


310, 321, 326, 


420-422 


lxilli-« 




420 


Xxiiil5-16 




367 


15 




58 


Ixiilio 




303 


XXiiil9-21 




395 


viii-7 




58 


Ixvi ««?• 




267 


xxiii22-25 




397 








1XV17 ««3- 




445 


xxiii26-28 




395 


Isaiah: 94, 160 


252-255, 








XXiiia9-35 


397 


, 417, 418 


279, 282-283, 


287, 


298, 


Jeremiah : 160, 


189, 


252- 


xxivi-6 




391 


303, 313, 338, 


339 




254, 287, 298, 310, 


539 


Xxivll-12 




395 


19 




267 


nil 




178 


XXivl3-14 




393 


110 




267 


1123 




173 


XXivl5-22 




391 


112-4 




313 


1112 




178 


XSiv23-25 




393 


Vl2 




356 


Vi2 




347 


XXiv30-32 




396 


Vl9 seq. 




267 


Vll9 




173 


XXiv30-34 




418 


viio 




298 


Xll3, 17 




173 


XXV 




312 


viii4 




523 


xvii3 




239 


XXv4-5 




367, 391 


ixi sea-. 




267 


Xlx5 




173 


xxv^-io 




391 


1X4 




403 


xxvlis 


306-307 


XXv6-7 




393 


^22 seq. 




267 


•xxxiis 


266, 443 


XXV8 




388, 389 


Xi2 




303 


XXX131-34 




669 


XXVll. 12 




388 


xli 




313 


XXXl38 




177 


XXV13 




388, 389 


Xlll-Xlv23 


298 


313 


xxxUU 




177 


XXV20 




388, 389 


xiliie 




178 


XXX1135 




174 


XXV9-10, 21-22 


391 


xiv 




407 


XXXV12 




170 


XXV25 




388 


XV 




298 


1-11 




298 


xxv-xxix 




388, 391 


XV-XV112 




313 


129 




177 


XXvi4-5 




391 


xxli-10 




297 


113 




177 


XXVi20-21 




367 


XXXilll5se?- 




356 








XXVi24-26 




395 


xxiv-xxvii 


123, 


298, 


Lamentations : 56, 126, 128, 


xxviii'* 




388 


313, 375-376, 384 


164, 173, 234, 


252, 


253, 


xxviiio 




389 


xxv8 




445 


261, 287, 297, 


298 


310, 


xxvii22 




388 


xxvlilii-12 




444 


319 






Xxvii23-2r 




397, 417 


xxixi3 


267 


298 


116 




239 


xxviiiio 




388 


xxxi 




303 


111 381 


, 382, 401 


xxir2-4 




397 


xxxil-xxxv 




313 


11120 




178 


•yyy5-6 




391 


xxxiii5 




303 


11141 




298 


XXX7-9 




397 


xxxlv-xxxv 




298 








XXxll-14 




397 


xxxvii2 




178 


Ezekiel: 126,12^ 


M28 


,132, 


XXX15-16 




395, 417 


xxxvii22-55 




560 


1(50, 252-255, 


297 


298, 


xxxi- 




391 


xl-lxvl 56,58,295 


,298, 


300, 310. 339 






xxxi^ia 




395 


300, 303, 313, 645 


vllii7 




178 


YXT20 




388 


Xl3 


266, 267 


xivi^20 




351 


XXX21-23 




395 


xl3-5 




267 


XX132 




240 


XXX24-28 


398 


417-418 


Xll2 seq. 




551 


XXV1113 




351 


XXX2^33 




395 


xliii 




303 


xxxiii-xxxvlli 




445 


XXXilO-31 




383, 417 


xllii-4 
xliv3 




267 
303 


XXXVi28 
Xli20 




297 

177 


Ecclesiastes 


: 126 


, 127, 128, 


xliv9 




177 


Xlvi22 




177 


130, 131, 


141, 


143, 145, 


Xliv24 




551 


xlviliie 




177 


164, 234, 


247, 


248, 252, 


xlvllii^ 




303 








253, 255, 


261 


277, 287, 


11113-1111 


424-425 


Daniel : 123, 126 


127 


128, 


297, 298, 


300, 


310, 320, 


liiil 




267 


129, 164, 212, 


252, 


253, 


321, 324 






11114 


239, 267 


254, 255, 261 


, 274 


297, 


v7 




55 


11117-8 




267 


298, 304, 324, 


327, 


342, 


ix8 




298 


lvl4-5 




344 


351 seq., 519 






X8-U 




397 


11x7-8 




444 


viii 




265 








Ix 


384 


535 


yii9 seq. 




445 



INDEX OE TEXTS 



675 



Daniel : 




Zechariah 


: 160, 


250, 


252, 


Matthew: 




ix2 


117, 123 


297, 310-311 






xv^ 


5 


xi 


297 


1-viil 






298 


xv? 


267 


Xi31 


265 


1112 






178 


xvis 


299 


3di 


445 


iv 






666 


XV117-19 


515 


xiii 


265 


Vlll2 






298 


xvlis 


299 






ix-xl 






298 


Xvi25 


69 


Hosea: 160, 252, 


254, 298, 


Xll2, 13 






266 


XV127 


299 


310, 338 




xil-xlv 




298 


,310 


xvii^ 


524 


iio 


266 


xiv2 






178 


XVill8-9 


90 


iiio 


173 


Xiv6 seq. 




132, 426 


xvilli7 


299 


ii20 


403 










xviii35 


299 


ii23 


266 


Malachi : 


247, 252, 254, 297, 


xix3 


260 


iv'' 


178 


298, 309 


311 






Xix3 «eg. 


440 


xii 


443 


ill-14 






132 


xix7-8 


269 


xiiii 


173 


113 






178 


Xlx8 


645 


xiiii4 


347 


1111 






267 


xixll-12 


394 


Xiv2-10 


419-420 


11123 






297 


XX132 


201 






iv6 






4 


XX142-44 


439 


Joel: 160, 297, 


298, 309, 










Xxill5^6 


63 


311,338 




Matthew : 


133,135,136,290, 


XXii23-32 


439 


ii28-32 


266 


327, 330 






xxii29 


117 


iiil seq. 


446 


i20-21 






523 


XXil43-45 


262, 437 






i22-23 






523 


xxiii8-i2 


401 


Amos: 160, 252, 


297, 298, 


1117 






266 


xyilli2 


387 


310, 311 




1113 






267 


xxiyis 


265 


iv6 


297 


11113-18 






443 


XXlv23-24 


543 


vi5 


356 


iv4 






14 


Xxlv36 


299 


ix2-3 


348 


iY4-10 






437 


XXV29 


387 


ix7 


535 


ivl4 






267 


XXV31-48 


404, 405 






v-vil 






392 


XXVi39 


29!) 


Obadiah : 


160, 298 


yl7 


123 


,131 


387 


xxvi4i 


387 






ylS 




14 


387 


xxvil9 250, 


266, 310, 


Jonah: 160, 298, 


309, 311, 


V21 seq. 






440 


320 




319, 345 seq. 




y29-30 






90 


xxvili9 


527 


112-9 


305 


V45 






3 


XXVii24-25 


527 






vii-^ 




408-409 






Micah: 160, 252, 


310, 311, 


Vil4-15 




299 


392 


Mark: 133, 135 


, 136, 310, 


338 




Yil6-18 




408-409 


327, 330 




11112 


307 


yil9-21 






396 


123 


267 






Vi24 






392 


144 


269 


Nahum : 160 


, 309, 311 


vil6 






392 


1117 


388 


118 


298 


vii'-8 






389 


1125-28 


438, 645 


ilii 


298 


vii24-27 






404 


11116 


514 






viiii7 






267 


11131-35 


305 


Habakkuk: 160, 


297, 310 


Viii20 






389 


11133-35 


306 


311 




1x12 






388 


Iv 


657 


112 


178 


X2 






514 


iv25 


387 


111 


314 


X39 






70 


Vl4 


244 






Xi2^27 






299 


vii6 


267 


Zephanlah: 160, 


297, 309, 


xil4-8 






438 


vUio 


268 


311 




xiii7 






267 


V1113 


5 


112 


298 


xii36-37 






392 


vili4 


269 


iil5 


298 


Xii39-41 






266 


Vlil35 


69 


11114 


298 


Xii4&47 






305 


Viii38 


299 






xii48-50 






306 


1x7 


524 


Haggai : 160, 252 


297, 298, 


Xiiil4 






267 


1x43-48 


90 


309, 311 




xiii5r 






244 


1x49 


242 






XV4 






268 


x3-5 


269 



676 



INDEX OF TEXTS 



Mark: 




Luke: 




Acts: 




xii-12 


86 


XX27-38 


439 


viil28-30 


267 


xi25-26 


299, 392 


XX42 


250 


X44-47 


518 


xiiio-u 


439 


XX42-44 


262 


xiiiis 123 


131, 179 


xiil8-27 


439 


XXi20 


265 


xiii27 


131, 179 


Xii26 


174, 268 


XXii29 


299 


xiii33 


264 


xii36-37 


262 


XXii42 


299 


XV 


447 


Xiiil4 


265 


XXiv23' 


268 


Xv21 


268 


Xiii32 


299 


XXiv25 


131 


xvii2, 11 


117, 131 


xiv^s 


387 


XXiv44 


129, 131 


Xviii24,28 


131 


Xvi9-20 


314 


Xxiv44 seq- 


441 


xix^ 


518 


xviis 


4 


XXix49 


299 


XX28 
XXVi22 


241, 300 
270 


Luke: 133, 135, 


136, 190, 


John: 103, 133, 


135, 136, 


xxviii23 


131, 268 


290, 326, 330 




325, 327, 330 




xxviii23 


131, 268 


il3-17 


560 


114 


73, 525 






130-33 


560 


11-14 


72 


Romans : 134, 135 


, 136, 300, 


135-37 


524, 560 


118 


63 


310 




142-45 


560 


123 


257 


13 


525 


14&-55 


560 


140-42 


515 


116 


655 


168-79 


560 


145 


270 


iiii 


74 


ii2 


530 


iiiia 


525 


1119-18 


444 


1110-12 


560 


iiil6 


654 


iii21 


652 


1129-35 


560 


lv44 


244 


iv 


446 


iii4 


267 


V3-1 


527 


lv3 seq. 


444 


iiiS 


299 


Vl8 


299 


lv6-8 


262 


lyl6 


179 


V39 


117 


lvl9 


201 


lvlft-22 


438 


v46-47 


270 


Vl4 


201 


Ivir 


267 


yl63 


657 


viiis 


525-526 


lv23-24 


244 


viii'' 


428, 668 


ix25 


266 


Vl4 


269 


Vill9-23 


269 


ix27 


267 


V31-32 


388 


Vii23 


268 


1x29 


267 


vl3-5 


438 


V1138 


668 


X6-10 


444 


Vll4 


514 


Yll53_yiilll 


314, 527 


Xl6 


267 


Vl35 


3 


X34 


117, 131 


Xl8 


444 


vi47-49 


404 


X34.36 


437 


X20-21 


267 


viiiis 


387 


Xii25 


70 


xi2 


174 


villl9-20 


306 


Xii34 


131 


Xi4 


173 


viii2i 


306 


xii38 


267 


Xi9-10 


262 


ix24 


70 


Xii39-41 


267 


xiii 


642 


1x26 


299 


XV3 


658 


XV12 


267 


ix34 


524 


Xv25 


131 


Xvil-23 


315 


ix59 


389 


xvis 


73 






x7 


270 


xviii- 


658 


1 Corinthians: ] 


L34, 135, 


x21-22 


299 


XXl7 


299 


136, 300 




Xi48 


201 






ill 


315 


Xi52 


5 


Acts: 134, 135, 


136, 290, 


ii2 


652 


Xii32 


299 


327, 330, 331 




iii 


447 


Xliil4 seq. 


438 


116-20 


262 


vilio-ii 


88 


xivii 


387 


120 


443 


1x9 se?. 


444 


XV 


438 


ii 


517-518 


ixl4 


270 


xvii3 


392 


1116 


266 


x3-4 


545 


XVil7 


387 


1116 seq. 


446 


X4 


444 


xviis 


87 


1125-29, 34 


262 


Xi3 


525 


Xvi29-31 


131 


11122-24 


270-271 


Xl23 seq. 


270 


Xvii32 


439 


iii24 


266, 268 


xiiio 


517 


xviiii4 


387 


lv25 


262 


xiiii2 


650 


Xix23 


387 


V37 


530 


xiv2i 117 


131, 444 


XX17-18 


439 


Vii37 


270 


Xiv23 


517 



INDEX OF TEXTS 



en 



1 Corinthians : 






Hebrews 


XV24-25 






543 


13 


XV4^" 






524 


iil4-18 


Xvil5 seq. 






315 


iv 

iv7 


2 Corinthians : 


134, 


135, 


ivl2 


136, 300. 








vil 


iii3 






669 


Viil4 


iii7 






444 


vii26-28 


iiil4 






118 


vliis 


iiii5 






268 


yiiiio-u 


viii9 






525 


1x19 

xi 


Galatians . 


134,135,136,300 


X28 


ii 






447 


xi 


115 






201 


Xi40 


iv* 




525-526 


xill8-24 


iv9 






643 


Xii21 



iy24 
yS 



74 
444 
201 



Ephesians : 134, 135, 136 
1120-22 516 

v25-26 669 



Philipplans : 134, 135, 136 
116-8 525 

1112 9 

Colossians : 134, 135, 136 

115 525 

ii3 657 

118 5 

1117 63, 446, 643 

1 Thessalonlans : 134, 135, 
136 

2 Thessalonlans : 134, 135, 
136 

1 Timothy : 134, 135, 136, 
310 

1 447 



1115 

liiis 



300 
300 



2 Timothy : 134, 135, 136 

110 525 

liis 348, 444, 527 

iiiis 131, 655 



Titus : 
nil 

Philemon : 



134, 135, 136 
651, 659 

134, 145, 136 



Hebrews : 134, 135, 136, 138, 
247,248, 301, 319 
11-4 301 



525 

301 

445 

268 

60, 655 

445 

270 

301 

271, 631 

669 

271 

446, 631 

270 

444 

631 

301 

271 



James: 134, 135, 136, 138, 
141, 143, 145, 164, 190, 247, 
340 

ii 447 

ii8-i3 444 

1121 seq. 443 

yii 444 

y14 299 

vl7 444 

1 Peter : 134, 135, 136, 164, 
299 

123 14, 655, 657 

i{9 seq. 446 

ii^ seq. 516 

iiiis 240 seq. 

2 Peter: 135, 136,138,143, 

247 

121 27 

114 seq. 444 

iiii6 307 

1 John : 134, 135, 136, 164 
v' 314 

xiv26 69 

2 John: 134, 135, 136, 138, 
164 

3 John : 134, 135, 136, 138, 
164, 299 

Jude: 134, 135, 136, 138, 
143, 164, 247, 299 
9 348 

9-14 132, 444 

14 265 

Revelation: 135, 136, 137, 
138, 139, 141, 143, 164, 



190, 247, 291, 


299, 803, 


326, 327 




i4-iii22 


299 


ii 


447 


Xiil seq. 


445 


xii^ 


445 


xiiis 


445 


xiiiis 


445 


Xvil2 


445 


xvlis 


445 


xvii 


296 


xviis 


445 


xviii2 


445 


xxi-Txii 


445 


xxiiis 


299 


XXiil8-19 


7 



Old Testament Apoc- 
rypha 

Esdras: 138,195,198 

iv 342 

iv33-4i 60, 78 

Tobit:63,138,195,198,342 
Iv'-ii 398 

lvi5 132 

Judith: 63, 138, 195, 196, 
198, 342 

Wisdom of Solomon: 129, 
138, 164, 195, 197, 198, 
301, 320 

Ecclesiasticus : 123. 138, 

145, 164, 189, 195, 197, 
198, 352 

iv5 132 

lv3i 132 

vii32-35 397 

xxiv23 lis 

XXV13-15 395 

XXV129 385 

123 
123 
124 

138, 198 



xliv-1 
xlixio 

1 

Baruch : 



Epistle of Jeremiah: 138, 
198 

Prayer of Manasseh: 138, 
195 

Books of Maccabees : 138, 
195, 196, 198 
1 and ii 138 



1 Maccabees ; 

156 



164 
117 



678 



INDEX OF TEXTS 



1 Maccabees : 






Apoc. Baruch : 


324 


157 




118 


Apoc. Ezra: 128, 129, 


134, 


ii60 




352 


138, 257 




Yiii7 




129 


xivi9 


120 


xii9 




117 


Assumption of Moses : 

342 
Ascension of Isaiah: 


132, 


2 Maccabees : 




145 


324 


iil4 




172 


Testament of Twelve Pa- 


4: Maccabees : 




342 


triarchs : 
Martyrdom of Isaiah : 


324 
138 


PSEUDEPIGRAPHA 




Book of Jubilees : 138 


, 175 


Apoc. Enoch : 


129, 131, 


132, 


Psalter of Solomon: 


320, 


138, 304, 324 


,353 




322, 324 





New Testament Apoc- 
rypha 
Didache: 132,135,136 

Hermas : 135, 136, 197 

Clement : 135, 138, 198 

Barnabas: 135, 136, 138, 

197 
Gospel to the Hebrews : 136 
Acts of Paul: 135,136 

Apocalypse of Peter: 135, 

136 
Preaching of Peter : 135 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



Abbot, Ezra, 206, 241 
A. B. C. of women, 312 
Aben Ezra, 274 
Abraham, 52, 53 
Abraham ben Meir, 235, 

236 
Accents, 59, 181, 220, 358, 

S69 seq., 2,11 seq. 
Accommodation, principle 

of, 260 
Adams, Wm., 66 
Addai, 134 
Adeney, W. F., 589 
Adonay, 173 
Adultery, Jesus views of, 

86 seq. 
Aglen, A. S., 359 
Ainsworth, Henry, 462, 

467 
Akiba, 130, 145, 175, 191, 

232 
Aldine Text, 206 
Alexander, Add., 284 
Alexandrian Codex, 138 
Alexander the Great, 64, 

121, 122, 172 
Allegory, 434 seq., 444, 448 

seq. 
Alphabetical poems, 56, 

377, 382, 383, 400 
Alphonso de Alcala, 140 
Alphonso de Zamora, 140 
Amana, Sixtus, 225 
Ambrose, 318, 449 
Ames, Wm., 466, 477, 574 
Amira, 222 
Ammon, C. F., 575 
Amoraim, 253 seq. 
Anagogical sense, 453 
Analogy of Faith, 461, 

483 
Analogy of Prophecy, 295 
Angel, theophanic, 302 
Angels, evil, 333 
Anglo-American Kevision, 

216 



Anglo-Catholic party, 148 
Anglo-Saxon Versions, 214 
Anonymes, 319 seq. 
Anselm, 41 
Anthropomorphisms, 57, 

178 
Antiochan school, 258, 457 

seq. 
Antwerp Polyglot, 187, 

206 
Aphraates, 239 
Apocalypse, 143, 145, 296 
Apostles' Creed, 92, 106, 143, 

145, 483 
A priori method, 115, 116 
Appropriation of Grace, 

660 seq. 
Aquila, 191 
Aquinas, Thomas, 454 
Arabic Gospel of the In- 
fancy, 522 
Arabic language, 46 
Arabic Version, 214 
Aramaic language, 49, 61 

seq. 
Aramaic script, 189 
Aramaic Versions, 210 seq. 
Archseology, Biblical, 490, 

554 
Archaeology, Oriental, 606 
Arias Montanus, 187, 222. 
Aristeas, 189 
Aristion, 447 
Armenian Version, 195 
Arminians, 459 
Arnaud, 507 
Articles of Eeligion, 15, 

148, 653 
Asarias, 366 
Ashe, Simeon, 465 
Assimilation, 201 
Assonance, 373 seq. 
Assyrian language, 47 
Astruc, 246, 250, 278 seq. 
Atheism, 77, 574 
Attention in prayer, 661 
679 



Attersol, Wm., 467 
Augustine, 41, 100, 139, 

143, 449, 450, 489 
Augustinian tradition, 147 
Authenticity, 93 seq. 
Authority of Christ, 261 
Authority of Holy Scrip- 
ture, 630 
Authorized Version, 216 
Autographs, 190, 616 seq. 

Baba Bathra, 121, 252, 

312, 313, 318 
Bacher, W., 175, 181, 183 
Bacon, B. W., 10 
Bacon, Lord, 100 
Baer, S., 184, 185, 187, 

231 
Baethgen, F. R., 506, 588 
Ball, John, 460, 465, 466 
Baraithoth, 232, 252, 320, 

351, 430 
Barbier, A. A., 323 
Bar Kappara, 232 
Barnabas, 133, 448 
Basil, 258 
Basnage, 491 
Baudissin, W., 506 
Baumgartner, Ant., 173, 

189 
Baur, Bruno, 502 
Baur, F. C, 498 seq., 578 

seq., 581 seq., 597 
Baur, G. L., 493 
Baur, Lorenzo, 576 
Bayne, Paul, 467 
Baxter, Richard, 101, 157, 

226, 230, 629, 630 
Beck, C. D., 212, 469 
Beda, 454 
Beecher, W. J., 287 
Belgian Confession, 142 
Bellarmin, 213 
Benedictus, 560 
Bengel, J. A., 207, 227,, 

491, 574 



680 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



Bensly, R. L., 212 
Bentley, Rich., 107, 226, 

250 
Benzinger, J., 37 
Berg, Conrad, 101 
Berger, Sam., 142 
Berliner, 211 
Bernard, 584 
Bertheau, Karl, 59, 101, 

279, 506 
Bevan, A. A., 353, 354 
Beza, Theo., 206, 217, 224, 

459 
Beyschlag, W., 498, 500, 

589 
Bible Educator, 359 
Bible for Learners, 285 
Bibles, Little, 7 
Biblical Dogmatics, 577, 

594 
Biblical Ethics, 597 
Biblical Religion, 598 
Bibliology, 113 
Bibliolatry, 5, 626 
Bickell, G., 137, 364, 365, 

381, 382 
Biddle, 574 
Bilson, T., 216 
Birt, T., 191 
Bishops' Bible, 215 
Bissel, E. C, 287 
Blake, F., 465 
Blasphemous, 178 
Blass, F., 203, 209 
Blayney, Benj., 186 
Bleek, F., 70, 283, 472 
Block, Ph., 47 
Bochart, 490 
Boderianus, Fabr., 222 
Bohl, Edw., 210 
Book of Adam, 49 
Book of Common Prayer, 

92 
Book of John, 49 
Book of Jubilees, 237 
Book of Sohar, 432 
Book of Yashar, 355 
Book of Wars of Yahweh, 

355 
Bosheth, 173 
Bottcher, F., 57, 59 
Bousset, Wm., 590 
Boyle, Robert, 656, 662 
Brentius, 224 
Brightman, Thos., 466 
Brockelmann, C, 49 
Broughton, Hugh, 221, 467 
Brown, C. R., 50 
3rown, Francis, 10, 20, 47, 



48, 262, 265, 287, 381, 

475, 506, 512, 513 
Browning, Robt., 92 
Bruce, A. B., 339, 588, 

590 
Buber, Sol., 234 
Budde, Karl, 381 
Buddeus, 491 
Buhl, F., 48, 117, 118, 138, 

189, 192, 200, 204, 211, 

212, 475 
Bullinger, H., 457 
Bunsen, 285 
Buxtorf , 121, 147, 221, 235, 

259, 475, 490, 621 
Byfield, Nich., 84, 467 

Cabala, 432 

Calamy, Ed., 144, 157, 

226 
Calmet, A., 276, 491 
Calvetus, 147, 574 
Calvin, 41, 93, 142, 217, 

220, 224, 247, 248, 457, 

458, 482, 490 
Cambridge Platonists, 575 
Cambridge School, 157, 226 
Cantilation, 181 
Canus, Melch., 249 
Capel, Rich., 623 
Cappellus, Jac, 225 
Cappellus, Lud., 89, 222 

seq., 225, 246, 259, 459. 
Carlov, A. C, 147 
Carlstadt, A., 250 
Carpzov, J. G., 259, 276, 

428, 458, 467 
Cartwright, Thos., 149, 

248. 459, 466, 467 
Caryl, Joseph, 467 
Casaubon, Isaac, 225, 250 
Caspari, C. E., 46 
Castell, Edw.,49,222,475 
Catholic Church, 501 
Catholic spirit, 571 
Cave, A., 36 
Census of Quirinius, 530 
Ceriani, A. M., 193, 198, 

199, 202, 203 
Chains, 454 
Charles, R. H., 237 
Charteris, A. H., 143, 144 
Chase, F. H., 203 
Cheltenham list, 135, 138 
Cheyne, T. K., 130, 290, 

313,490,509,556,557 
Chiarini, L. A., 233, 430, 433 
Chiya, 232 
Christophanj^ 545 



Chronology, 490, 512, 554 

Chrysostom, 138, 257, 452, 
454 

Church, 241, 299 

Church of England, 148 

Cicero, 340 

Circumcision, 269 

Citations, 100, 210, 266, 304 

Clapp, Sam., 467 

Clarke, Adam, 278 

Clean and unclean, law of, 
643 

Clement of Alexandria, 
257, 448 

Clement of Rome, 133, 448 

Clementine Homilies, 257 

Clementine Recognitions, 
447 

Clementine Text, 213 

Clericus, J., 259, 275 

Cocceius, J., 222, 465, 472, 
574 

Codex, 191, 194; Alexan- 
drinus, 197, 198, 207; 
Ambrosianus, 199 ; Am- 
iatinus, 213; Baby- 
lonicus, Petr., 185; 
Barberinus, 200 ; Ben 
Asher, 184; Bezse, 200 ; 
Bodleian ^^s, 199 ; Borne- 
rianus, 201 ; Chisianus, 
200 ; Claromontanus, 
201 ; Coislinianus, 200 ; 
Ephraem, 198; Fulden- 
sis, 213; Hillel, 184; 
Jericho, 184 ; Leon, 203 ; 
Marchalianus, 199, 200; 
Mugar, 184; Samaritan, 
185; Sanbuki, 184;Sar- 
ravianus, 200 ; Sinai, 
184; Sinaiticus, 196, 
197; Toletanus, 213; 
Vaticanus, 195, 196; 
Vaticanus330, 204 ; Vati- 
canus452, 198 ; Vati- 
canus556j 199 ; Venetus, 
200 

Cohn, 237 

Coins, Maccabean, 170 

Colenson, J. W., 284, 285 

Collections of writings, 
310 565 . 

Coin, Daniel von, 577, 578, 
593 

Commandments of Law, 
560, 561 

Compilations, 326 

Complutensian Polyglot, 
140, 186, 206 



INDEX OE NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



681 



Concatenation in Poetry, 

399 
Conflation in Text, 191, 

205, 242 
Consistency in Text, 90 
Constautine, 194 
Construct state, 56 
Contemporary History, 

505 
Contradiction, law of, 82 
Cornill, C. H., 118, 175, 

192, 194, 199, 200, 204, 290 
Corpus Inscriptionum 

Semit., 47 
Corrections of Scribes, 178 
Cosin, J., 151, 156 
Council of Laodicea, 137 
Council of Trent, 77, 143, 

144, 145, 146, 156 
Covenant, 553, 604 
Covenant, new and old, 

119 
Covenant, principle of, 

466 
Coverdale, Miles, 105, 214, 

215 
Cowley, 49 

Creation, story of, 551 
Credibility, 95 
Cremer, H., 73 
Cross, J. A., 313 
Crusius, L. F. O. B., 577 
Cureton, 212 
Curtis, E. L., 514 
Curtis, S. I., 287, 311 
Curtius, E., 65, 66, 67 
Cyprian, 448 
Cyril of Alexandria, 185 

D, 297 

Dagesh, 180 

Dahne, 588 

Dalman, G. H., 50, 211 

Daniel, 94 

Davenant, J., 467 

David, 53, 56, 94, 336 

Davidic Psalter, 304 

Davidson, A. B., 286, 301 

Davidson, Saml., 90, 137, 

229, 284, 285, 447, 450, 

454 
Deborah, 56 
De Dieu L., 225, 459 
D'Etaples, Lefevre, 217 
De imitatione Christi, 93 
De Rossi, Az., 221,228 
De Rossi, J. B., 183 
De Saulcy, F., 507 
De vita contempL, 125 



De Wette, W. M. L., 241, 

283, 285, 472, 493, 497, 

576, 577, 578, 593 
Defile the hands, 130 
Deism, 77, 574 
Deissmann,G.A.,591,593 
Deists, 492 
Delitzsch, Franz, 187, 231, 

312, 313, 321, 391,472 
Delitzsch, Fried., 47, 61 
Deluge story, 529 
Demetrius Ducas, 140 
Demosthenes, 74, 340 
Descartes, 9 
Deuteronomic code, 119 
Deuteronomic history, 540 
Deuteronomic writers, 301 
Deutsch, Eman., 232 
Development hypothesis, 

283 seq. 
Dexter, H. M., 96 
Dialectic differences, 300 
Dickson, W. P., 590 
Dietenberger's version, 

217 
Diestel, Lud., 28, 247, 451, 

452 
Dillmann, Aug., 47, 173, 

175, 181, 192, 237, 330, 

587 
Diodorus of Tarsus, 452 
Director's psalter, 243 
Dirge, 381 
Dittography, 243 
Divorce, 269, 645 
Documentary hypothesis, 

280 seq. 
Documentary sources, 563 

seq. 
Doddridge, Philip, 467 
Dodwell, H., 157 
Donaldson, J. W., 66 
Dorner, Aug., 451 
Dorner. Isaac, 22, 72, 167, 

143, 147, 158, 279, 442, 

499, 665, 666 
Douay version, 215 
Driver, S. R., 48, 49, 54, 

170, 203, 239, 290, 295, 

296, 297, 336,351,475 
Droysen, J. G., 84 
Drummond, James, 590 
Drusius, J., 224, 459 
Du Bose, W. P., 590 
Du Pin, L. E., 96, 97. 99, 

101, 102, 106, 276, 277, 

278 
Duff, Arch., 588 
Duhm, B., 290 



Dury, John, 573 
Dutch version, 217 
Duval, 49 

E, 297 

Ebers, G., 506 

Eck, J., 142 

Eck's version, 217 

Edersheim, 506 

Efficacy of Holy Script- 
ure, 659. 

Egyptian text, 197 

Egyptian version, 195 

Eichhorn, J. G., 126, 127, 
132, 186, 250, 251, 278, 
279 seq., 282, 471, 491, 
492, 493, 497, 576 

Eleazer ben Azariah, 130 

Elieser, 235, 431 

Eliot, John, 96 

Eloquence, 359 

Elzevir editions, 207 

Emancipation proclama- 
tion, 100 

Emendations of the scribes, 
173 

Emser's version, 217 

English version, 214 seq. 

Ephraem, the Syrian, 137, 
239,452 

Ephraimitic writers, 119, 
300, 545, 559 

Epic of Istar, 380 

Epiphanius, 192 

Epitomes, 454 

Erasmus, 141, 206, 219, 
468 

Erman, A., 378, 506 

Ernesti, J. A., 428, 469 

Erpenius, 214, 222, 225 

Errors in Scripture, 520, 
608,614,627seg.,634seg. 

Essays and Reviews, 285 

Essenes, 128 

Etheridge, J. W., 63, 211, 
433 

Ethiopic language, 46 

Etymological differences, 
296, 297 

Eucherius of Lyons, 449 

Euphemisms, 178 

Eusebius, 64, 103, 136, 185, 
191, 192, 194, 362, 447, 
488, 489 

Euthymius, zigabenus, 454 

Evans, L. J., 10 

Everett, C. C, 590 

Everling, 590 

Ewald, H., 45, 59, 128, 



682 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



283, 284, 313, 339, 357, 

365,475, 504, 584,587 
Excluded Middle, Law of, 

82 
Extermination of Canaan- 

ites, 644. 
External evidence, 101 seq. 
Extraordinary points, 177 

Fables, 416 
Fabricius, J. A., 258 
Fairbairn, A. M., 493, 494 
Faith, 665 seq., 668 
Fall of Man, 547 
Father, used of God, 299 
Fathers, Christian, 156, 190 
Feasts, 183, 350 
Federal school, 466 
Fides divina, 143, 150, 281, 

282 
Fides humana, 150 
Field, Fred., 193, 194, 204 
Fisher, G. P., 600 
Five Rolls, 181 
Flacius, Matth., 457 
Flatt, C. C, 471 
Fleury, 278 

Forgery, 96, 319, 323,' 519 
Formal principle, 223 
Fox, John, 467 
Fragmentary hypotheses, 

282 seq., 290 
Franc, Geo., 101 
Francois, Laurent, 278 
Franke, A. H., 467 
Frankel, Z., 125 
French Confession, 653 
French versions, 217 
Frensdorff, Sam., 228 
Freudenthal, 189 
Friedlander, 235 
Friedmann, 234 
Friends, 155 
Fulke, Wm., 221 
Future Life, 648 

Gabler, J. P., 470, 491, 576, 

591 
Galileo, 9 

Galilean Confession, 142 
Ganneau, Cler., 48 
Gast, F. A., 287 
Gataker, Thos., 467 
Gautier, L., 508 
Gebhardt, O. von, 202, 

207, 208 
Gebhardt, H., 589 
Geddes, Alex., 282 
Gehenna, 91 



Geiger, A., 49 
Gelbhaus, 233 
Gemara, 233, 252 
Genevan version, 215 
Geography, Biblical, 507, 

554 
Gerhard, J., 458 
German versions, 216 seq. 
Germar, F. H.,470 
Gerson, J. C, 93 
Gesenius, 47,48, 117, 141, 

181, 185, 186, 283, 475, 

646 
Giesebrecht, F., 200 
Gieseler, J. C, 83 
Gilby, Ant., 215 
Gillespie, Geo., 83, 84 
Gillett, E. H., 455 
Ginsburg, C. D., 170, 172, 

173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 

179, 184, 187, 221, 228, 

231, 432, 433 
Ginza, 49 
Gladstone, 61 
Gloel, J., 590 
Glosses, 454 
God, doctrine of, 646 
Godwin, Thomas, 490 
Goeje, M. J. de, 46 
Goldsmidt, L. 233 
Goodwin, John, 574 
Gospel according to Peter, 

527 
Gospel in Holy Scripture, 

652 
Gothic Version, 195 
Gouge Wm., 262,467 
Gouldman, Henry, 236 
Grabe, 207. 
Grace of God, 624 seq., 651 

seq. 
Gradualness of develop- 
ment in Bib. Theo., 641 

seq. 
Graf, K. H., 585 
Grammatico-historical 

method, 470 
Gratz, H., 127, 130, 172, 

188, 229, 313, 505 
Gray, G. B., 514 
Great Bible, 215, 239 
Great Synagogue, 121 seq. 
Green, W. H., 229, 285, 

287, 289 
Greenhill, Wm., 467 
Gregory, C. R., 138, 196, 

197, 198, 200, 207 
Gregory the Great, 451 
Grenfeil, B. P., 133 



Griesbach, J. J., 207, 227 
Grill, J., 54, 57 
Grosart, A. B., 100, 318 
Grotius, 186, 225, 468 
Guerin, Victor, 507 
Guieysse, Paul, 378 
Gunkel, Herm., 556 
Gwilliam, C. H., 181 

Hadrian, 176 

Haggada, 63, 74, 235, 341, 

seq., 347, 348, 430, 438, 

443 
Hagenbach, K. C, 36, 37 
Hahn, G. L., 187, 583 
Halacha, 63, 74, 430 seq., 

437 seq., 444 
Hamilton, Patrick, 105 
Hamilton, Sir Wm., 82, 

106, 428 
Hammond, Henry, 250, 

468 
Hampton Court confer- 
ence, 216 
Haphtareth, 179 
Harkavy, A., 185 
Harmonies of Gospels, 247, 

490 
Harmonistic corruption, 

202 
Harnack, Adolph, 134, 

296,500,501,502 
Harper, W. R., 10, 20, 287 
Harris, Rendel, 181, 202, 

203, 212 
Hase, Karl, 500 
Hassencamp, 185, 186 
Hatch, E., 68, 71, 502 
Haupt, Paul, 10 
Hausrath, 63, 506 
Havernick, H. A. C, 581 
Havet, E., 502 
Hebrew Law, 323 
Hefele, C. J. von, 137 
Hegesippus, 488 
Heidegger, J. H., 147, 223, 

259, 276, 621 
Heidelberg Catechism, 652, 

655 
Heinrici, C. F., 36,37 
Heinsius, Dan., 459 
Helvetic confession, 142, 

457 
Henderson, E., 469 
Hengstenberg, E. W., 259, 

339, 504 
Henry, Matthew, 467 
Herder, 246, 250, 279, 471, 

491,576 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



683 



Heresy charges, 288 seq. 

Herle, Chas.,84, 152 

Hermas, 133 

Hess, 491 

Hesychius, 193, 199, 219 

Hexapla, 200 

Hieronymian tradition, 

147, 148 
Hilary, 449 
Hilgenfeld, 176, 499 
Hillel, 130, 131, 133, 232 
Himyaric language, 46 
Historic errors, 566 
Historic fiction, 567 
Hitzig, F., 585 
Hobbes, Thos., 250, 574 
Hodge, A. A., 158, 287, 320, 

609, 625 
Hodge, Chas., 132 
Hofmann, J. C. K., 284, 

472 
Hollazius, M. D., 458 
Hollenberg, 189 
Holmes and Parsons, 192, 

198, 199, 200, 204, 206, 

207 
Holsten, C, 499, 588 
Holtzmami,H. J., 117, 133, 

193, 503, 525, 589, 590 
Holtzmann, O., 506 
Holy Spirit, 303, 635, 654 
Holzinger, 297 
Hommel, F.,46, 507 
Home, T. H., 259, 284 
Hort, F. J. A., 86, 89, 90 
Hottinger, J. J., 185, 186 
Houbigant, 185 
Huet, P. D., 276 
Humanists, 456, 468 
Hume, David, 80 
Hunt, A. S., 133 
Hupfeld, H., 179, 283 
Huss, John, 455, 456 
Hutter, 187 
Hyde, Thos., 222 
Hymns, 415 

Hymn to Amen Ra, 399 
Hymn to the Nile, 400 
Hyslop, J. H., 82 

Ibeu Ezra, 235 
Identity, Law of, 178 
Idyll, 342 seq. 
Ignatius, 241 
Immer, A., 27,71,73,428, 

453, 472, 588 
Imperfect morality, 609 
Incarnation, 523 seq. 
Inclusion in poetry, 399 



Indelicate expressions, 178 
Inerrancy, 613, 615, 6195eg . , 

632 seq., 637 seq. 
Inspiration, 110 seq., 331 
Integrity, 92 seq., 106 
Intensive forms, 55 
Internal evidence, 101, 157 
Interpretations, 314 
Intrinsic probability, 90 
Inverted nuns, 177 
Irenseus, 191, 192, 257, 

448, 451 
Irons, W. J., 590 
Ismael, 430 
Israeli, Isaac, 235 
Issel, 590 

J, 297 

Jablonsky, P. E., 187, 252 

Jacob, 203 

Jacob ben Chayim, 140, 

186, 187, 219, 220 
Jacobus de Voragine, 332 
Jacob of Edessa, 194 
Jael, 644 

James, M. R., 129 
Jameson, Wm., 248 
Jamnia, Synod of, 128, 130, 

133, 141, 175 
Jay, Mich, de, 222 
Jebb, J., 367 
Jehuda, Rabbi, 232, 253 
Jelf, W. E., 67 
Jerome, 127, 137, 138, 139, 

143, 152, 174, 185, 191, 

192, 193, 194, 213, 219, 

258, 362, 453, 489 
Jerome of Prague, 455 
Jerusalem, 278 
Jochanan, 130, 252 
Johannine type, 602 
John, the Presbyter, 138, 

447 
Jonathan, 56 
Jones, Wm.,363 
Jose, 130 

Joseph the Blind, 211 
Josephus, 117, 127, 128, 174, 

175, 204, 237, 256, 318, 

362, 435, 487, 488 
Jost, J. M., 232, 505 
Juda ha Levi, 235 
Judaic writers, 119, 300, 

301, 547, 559 
Judas Mace, 128, 
Judgments of law, 560, 

562 
Jiilicher, A., 134, 135 
Julius African us, 488 



Junilius Africanus, 127, 

258, 452 
Junius, Letters of, 93 
Justin Martyr, 134 

Kabisch, 590 
Kahana, 234 
Kahle, A., 588 
Kaiser, P. C, 470, 576 
Kant, 9, 82, 470 
Kattenbusch, 106 
Kaulen, F., 214 
Kautzsch, 48, 50, 181, 475 
Keil, C. A. G., 470 
Keil, C. F., 229, 259, 504, 

536, 558, 559, 565 
Keim, Th., 498 
Kennicott, B., 183, 228 
Kidder, R., 250 
Kihn, H., 127, 449, 451, 

452, 453 
Kimchi, David, 184, 236 
Kimchi, Joseph, 236 
Kina measure, 381 
Kindred of Jesus, 305, 306 
King James's Version, 216 
Kirkpatrick, A. F., 588 
Kittel, R., 504 
Klausen, H. N., 428, 447, 

448, 450, 451, 456, 457, 

458, 472 
Klostermanu, E., 199, 200 
Knapp, G. C, 471 
Knight, C., 318 
Knobel, A., 283 
Knox, John, 482 
Kohler, 505 
Kohn, S., 186 
Kohut, A., 175 
Konig, F. E., 48, 475 
Koppe, 279, 282, 313 
Koran, 46 

Kostlin, K. R., 499, 589 
Krug, W. T., 9 
Kuenen, A., 122, 175, 285, 

385 seq. 

Labrat, 235 
Lachman, C, 208, 228 
Lagarde, P., 175, 184, 200, 

204, 209, 240 
Lane, E. W., 46 
Lange, J. P., 72, 312, 429, 

476, 480 
Latinization, 202 
Law, Ancient, 560 
Lechler, G. V., 157, 455, 

499 
Lee, W., 207 



684 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



Legend, 332, 335 seq., 497 

seq., 527 
Legenda Aurea, 332 
Legendary sources, 557 
Leigh, Edw., 462, 463, 

464, 467 
Leuormant, 333, 506 
Letters, 340 
Leucius Charinus, 135 
Leusden, 187 
Leviathan, 334 
Levita, Elias, 121, 140, 

141, 219, 220, 236, 475 
Levy, Jacob, 47, 50, 232 
Lewis, Mrs., 50, 212 
Ley, Julius, 369, 370 
Liberty of conscience, 114, 

115 
Liberty of opinion, 146 
Lightfoot, John, 84, 221, 

467, 490 
Lightfoot, J. B., 103, 445 
Linguistic differences, 296 
Literal sense, 453 
Literary study of the Bible, 

294 seq. 
Lock, Walter, 133 
Locke, John, 469 
Logia Jesu, 133 
Logos, 625, 654 
Loisy, A., 170 
London Polyglot, 185, 207 
Lord, applied to Christ, 241 
Love of God, 349, 646 
Lowth, 94, 226, 227, 229, 

230, 246, 250, 278, 366, 

367, 468, 471 
Lucian, 173, 193, 204, 205, 

219, 451 
Lucian's text, 203 seq. 
Lucius, P. E., 126 
Lticke, F., 101,471,472 
Lumby, J. R., 106 
Luther, Martin, 41, 80, 142, 

206, 216, 224, 247, 342, 

455, 456, 458, 482, 652, 

653 
Lutterbeck, J. A. B., 589 
Lutz, J. L. S., 472, 479, 

480 
Lux Mundi, 92 
Luzzato, S. D., 50 
Lyford, 154, 622, 665 

Maccabeus, Judas, 172 
Madden, F. W., 554 
Magnificat, 560 
Maimonides, 235 
Man, Doctrine of, 647 



Mandeans, 49 
Mangey, 237 
Manifold sense, 461 
Mansi, J. D., 137 
Mappiq, 180 
Mar Ukba, 170 
Mar Zutra, 170 
Marcus Aurelius, 192 
Maresius, 259 
Marsh, G. P., 332 
Martin Marprelate tracts, 

93 
Martinius, M., 225 
Masius, 250 
Massebieau, 126 
Massorites, 180 seg. 
Matthew, Thos., 215 
McClelland, A., 477 
McCosh, J., 82 
McCurdy, J. F., 506 
McGiffert, A. C, 64, 136, 

310, 315, 316, 488, 489, 

500, 517, 518 
Means of Grace, 651 seq, 
Mechilta, 178, 234 
Mede, Joseph, 225, 250 
Megillath Taanith, 235 
Meier, Ernst, 369 
Melancthon, 457 
Memphitic version, 195 
Menegoz, E., 590 
Mercer, J., 224 
Mercati, G., 192, 193 
Merrill, Selah, 507 
Merx, A., 125 
Mesha stone, 48, 170 
Messianic idea, 303, 304, 648 
Messner, H., 581 
Metaphors, 359 
Metres, 361 
Methodism, 157 
Meyer, A., 50 
Meyer, H. A. W., 241, 472 
Meyer, L., 470 
Michaelis, J. D., 185, 187, 

279, 491 
Midrashim, 174, 177, 189, 

234, 235 
Mielziner, M., 253, 431 
Mill's text, 207, 226 
Minuscules, 195 
Miracles, 345 seg., 543 
Mishna, 130, 232, 429, 431 
Mitchell, A. F., 84, 115, 

225, 248, 466 
Mitchell, H. G., 520 
Moabite stone, 48 
Mombert, J. I., 105 
Moore, Geo. F., 10, 20, 181, 



287, 290, 333, 334, 335, 

376 
Moore, Henry, 575 
Moral sense, 453 
Morals of O. T., 643 
Morinus, J., 185, 222, 223 
Morus, S. F., 428, 469 
Moses, 53, 94 
Moses ibn Ezra, 235 
Mozley, T., 281 
MSS., private, 183, 190 
Miiller, Max, 611, 612 
Miiller, D. H., 399 
Muller, Julius, 143, 158 
Miinster, Sebast., 186, 239 
Muratorian fragment, 135 
Murray, T. C, 313, 319 
Musculus, 224, 457 
Mystic spirit, 570 
Mystical sense, 453 
Myth, 331 seq., 333 seq., 

4:93 seq., 522 
Mythical sources, 555 seq. 

Nabatean language, 50 
Natural History of the 

Bible, 554 
Neale, J. M., 318 
Neander, 158, 284, 472, 499, 

578 seg., 582,587,591 
Nestle, E., 49, 194, 199, 

200, 206, 207, 211 
Nestorian Canon, 138 
Nestorius, 452 
Neubauer, A., 49, 50, 170, 

172, 184, 210 
Neutral Text, 195, 240 
Nicene Creed, 106 
Nicolaus de Lyra, 454, 455 
Niemeyer, A. H., 15 
Niese, B., 237 
Noldeke, Theo., 49, 176, 

325, 326 
Nunc Dimittis, 560 
Nutt, J. W., 50, 186 

(Ecolampadius, 224, 248, 

457, 458 
CEcumenius, 241, 454 
CEhler, G. F.,472,577, 580, 

587, 597 
Olivetan, 217 
Olshausen, J, 175 
Opinion, differences of, 99 

seq. 
Opitius, 187 
Opitz, H., 588 
Oratory in the Bible, 338 

seq. 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



685 



Orelli, C. von, 588 
Organic method, 471 
Origen, 127, 136, 137, 192, 

193, 199, 219, 362, 449 
Osgood, H., 287 
Osiauder, And., 213, 490 
Ottley, R. L., 556, 566, 

567 
Owen, eJohn, 157, 162, 223, 

224, 259, 621 

P, 297 

Palestine Exploration 

Fund, 508 
Paley, W., 491 
Palmer, Herb., 83, 100, 318 
Palmer, E. H., 507 
Palmyra, 50 
Papias, 447 
Papyrus, 170, 190, 191 
Parables of Jesus, 341 
Parallelism, 366 seq., 385 

seq. ; antithetical, 386, 

389, 392, 395, 396, 404; 

emblematical, 388, 389; 

introverted, 392, 394 ; 

progressive, 387, 389 ; 

synonymous, 385 seq., 

388, 408 
Paraphrase, 201 
Parashiyoth, 179 
Paris Polyglot, 206 
Parker, Matth., 215 
Patriotism of Esther, 350, 

351 
Patton, F. L., 287 
Paul of Nisibis, 258, 452 
Paul of Telia, 193 
Pauline Christianity, 502 
Payne, Thos., 492 
Pearson, John, 226 
Pearson, Rich., 236 
Pellicane, 224 
Perkins, Wm., 575 
Perles, F., 173, 176 
Perowne, J. J. S.,313,316 
Persian version, 214 
Peshat, 433 
Peshitto version, 23, 173, 

212 
Pesikta, 234 
Pesukim, 179 

Peter, naming of, 514 seq. 
Peter Lombard, 454 
Petermann, J. H., 49, 50, 

186 
Peters, J. P., 10, 20, 287 
Pfleiderer, O., 499, 500, 

501, 588 



Phagius, P., 224 
Phalaris, epistle of, 93, 107 
Pharisees, 128 
Philo, 117, 125, 126, 127, 

128, 133, 237, 257, 318, 

434, 435, 448, 488 
Philoxenus, 212 
Phoenician language, 47 
Photius, 135 
Piepenbring, Ch., 587 
Pietro della Valle, 185 
Piper, F., 554 
Pietism, 470, 574 
Pirque Aboth, 121, 129, 232, 

388, 389, 393, 394, 395, 

396 
Piscator, 224 
Planck, G. J., 260, 474 
Plato, 74 

Plummer, Alf., 264, 530 
Plural, abstract, 55 
Pneumatophany, 545 
Pocock, Edw., 222, 235, 

468 
Poetry, Arabic, 361 ; Baby- 
lonian, 380; composite, 

418 ; dramatic, 419 ; 

Egyptian, 378, 399; 

gnomic, 416; lyric, 415 

seq.; prophetic, 424; 

Syriac, 364 
Poetical sources, 559 
Point of view, 565 
Polyglots, 187 
Poole, Matth., 226, 249, 

467, 622 
Postilles, 454 
Practical divinity, 573 
Practical spirit, 571 
Prsetorius, 47 
Prayer, 415 
Pratensis, Felix, 186 
Prelatical authority, 151 
Presbyterians, 156, 226 
Presbytery of New York, 

288, 289 
Prideaux, H., 225, 276,491 
Priestly writers, 550, 560 
Princeton school, 162, 229 
Probebibel, 217 
Procopius, 185 
Pronunciation in Hebrew, 

176 
Prophecy, 544 
Prophets without honour, 

244, 245 
Protestant Reformers, 141, 

145, 146, 151, 219, 246, 

281, 282, 457 



Providence, 102, 103 
Pseudonymes, 323 seq. 
Ptolomaeus, Philadelphus, 

124 
Puritans, 149 seq., 162, 573 
Pusey, E. B., 454 

Qarites, 433 
Qeris, 177 
Quakers, 155 

Rab, 252, 333 
Rabbinical Bible, Bam- 
berg's, 186; Buxtorf's, 

187 
Rabboth, 234 
Rahab, 334 
Rainy, Robt., 110 
Rambach, J. J., 428, 467 
Ramsay, W. M., 331 
Raphe, 180 

Rapheleng, Franz, 222 
Rashi, 174, 211, 236, 454 
Rationalism, 77, 158, 480, 

492, 574 
Redemption, doctrine of, 

647 seq. 
Reformation, 77, 141, 219, 

246, 489, 652 seq. 
Refrains, 403, 408, 410, 413, 

414 
Regeneration, 657 
Reland, 491, 507 
Remoteness, 563 
Removal of particles, 176 
Renan, E., 497, 498, 537 
Repentance of Nineveh, 346 
Resch, A., 203 
Responsion in poetry, 399 
Reuchlin, J., 140, 141, 475 
Reuss, Edw., 68, 71, 143, 

153, 283, 356, 449, 471, 

582, 583, 585, 589 
Revelation in Jesus, 639 

seq.; in Nature, 637 seg.; 

in Reason, 639; in The- 

ophanies, 638 
Reynolds, John, 467 
Rhabanus Maurus, 454 
Rheims version, 215 
Rhyme, 361, 373 seq. 
Richter, 237 
Riddles, 416, 417, 418 
Riehm, Edw., 324, 445, 587 
Right of private judgment, 

161 
Ritschl, Albr., 500, 507, 

591 
Rivetus, And., 222, 249, 457 



686 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



Roberts, Francis, 464, 465, 
466, 467, 473, 482, 484 

Robertson, J., 334, 335, 
564 

Robinson and James, 527 

"Robinson, Edw., 48, 284, 
507, 532, 646 

Rodgers, John, 215 

Rodiger, Emil, 475 

Rolls, 169 5eg., 191 

Roman tradition, 147 

Rosenmiiller, C. F. K., 447 

Rothe, 158 

Rous, Fr., 491 

Row, C. A., 10 

Rudolph of Saxony, 489 

Rupertus Meldenius, 100, 
101 

Ryle, H. E., 118, 119, 120, 
122, 127, 129, 131, 237, 
335,336,513,529 

Saadia, 214, 235, 454 
Saalschutz, J. L., 363 
Sabatier, A., 588 
Sabbath, 269 
Sabean language, 46 
Sabians, 49 

Sacrifices, 308, 641 seq. 
Sacrifices for the dead, 145 
Sadducees, 128 
Salvation by works, 145 
Samaritans, 128 
Samaritan canon, 120 
Samaritan codex, 170 
Samaritan language, 50 
Sampson, Thos., 215 
Samson and Hercules, 333 

seq. 
Sanctification, 658 
Sandy, Wm., 126, 133, 135, 

137, 138 
Sayce, 45, 352, 513, 520, 

521,528,558 
Scaliger, J. J., 225, 490 
Scattergood, 226 
Schaff, Ph., 15, 64, 66, 71, 

72, 106, 208, 213, 216, 

318, 326, 500 
Schick, Conrad, 555 
Schiller, Szinissy, 184 
Schindler, 225 
Schleiermacher, 471, 472 
Schmid, C. F., 580, 587, 

591,597,598 
Schmidt, W., 589 
Schmiedel, P. W., 525 
Schneckenburger, M., 505 
Schnedermann, G., 222 



Scholastic spirit, 570 
Scholasticism, 112 seq., 141, 

575 
Scholastics, Lutheran, 147, 

259, 458 
Scholastics, Protestants, 

480 
Scholastics, Reformed, 147, 

225 
Scholastics, Swiss, 259 
Scholtz, J. M. A., 125, 227 
School of Calixtus, 147 
School of Reuss, 587 
School of Saumur, 122 
Schottgen, 366 
Schrader, E., 47, 51, 368, 

506 
Schroeder, P., 47 
Schuckford, 491 
Schultens, A., 475 
Schultz, Herm., 584, 597 
Schultze, 191 
Schiirer, E., 62, 192, 211, 

233, 430, 506 
Schwab, M., 233 
Schwally, Fr., 50 
Schwartzkopff, 590 
Schwegler, 499, 500 
Science and Bible, 612 
Scotch Confession, 149 
Scott, Thos., 467 
Script, Aramaic, 170 seq. 
Script, Phoenician, 170 
Scrivener, F. H. A., 86, 

89, 90, 226, 228, 241 
Sectarianism, 6 
Sedar olam zutta, 235, 

488 
Sedar olam rabba, 235, 

488 
Sedarim, 179 
Segond, Louis, 217 
Seller, G. F., 471 
Selden, J., 84, 225, 490 
Semler,J.S.,163,207,276, 

469, 470 
Separation of words, 243 
Sepp, 507 

Septuagint, 23, 125, 173, 175 
Shairp, 359, 360 
Shakespeare, 318 
Shammai, 130, 232 
Shedd, W. G. T., 159 
Shemitic languages, 19, 20 
Shewa, 59 
Shilo, 238 
Shulamite, 58 
Sidra d' Yahya, 49 
Sidra rabba, 49 



Siegfried, K., 274, 432, 

433, 435, 436, 449, 454 
Sifra, 234 
Sifri, 177, 234 
Silberstein, 199, 203 
Silence, argument from, 

101 seq. 
Siloam inscription, 48, 170 
Simeon ben Azai, 130 
Simeon ben Menasiah, 131 
Simeon Kara, 236 
Simon the Just, 121 
Simon Magus, 447 
Simon, Richard, 274, 275 
Sinaitic Codex, 138 
Sionita, Gabr., 222 
Sittenfeld, 232 
Sixtine text, 207, 213 
Slaying of Goliath, 558 
Smend, R., 48, 587 
Smith, Geo., 52, 506 
Smith, Geo. Adam, 286, 

508 
Smith, H. B., 624, 626 
Smith, H. P., 10, 95, 289 

seq., 290, 536 
Smith, Miles, 216 
Smith, R. P., 49 
Smith, W. R., 26, 47, 130, 

143, 176, 229, 286, 325, 

358, 588 
Socin, A., 48, 508 
Socrates, 9, 73 
Sodh, 432, 438, 439 
Solomon, 53, 94 
Sopherim, 176 seq. 
Sources of history, 331 
Spanheim, F., 276, 491 
Speaking with tongues, 

517 seq. 
Speculative spirit, 571 
Spinoza, B., 274 
Spittler, 137 

Spurgeon, C. H., 468, 481 
Stackhouse, 491 
Stade, B., 475, 504, 591 
Stanley, A. P., 507 
Stanton, V. H., 590 
Statutes of Law, 560, 561 
Stark, C. L. W., 470 
States Bible, 217 
Staudlein, C. F., 470 
Stephens, Robt., 186, 206, 

213 
Stern, 470 

Steudel, J. C. F., 471, 577 
Stevens, Geo. B., 590 
Strabo, Walafrid, 454 
Strack, Herm ,49,50, 121, 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



687 



128, 175, 184, 185, 189, 

228, 254, 255, 324, 351, 

471 
Strauss, D. F., 80, 494, 

495, 496, 498, 578 
Strophes, 398 seq. 
Stuart, Moses, 284, 428, 

469, 470 
Style, 97 seq., 330 
Style of Epistle to the 

Hebrews, 301, 302 
Style of Job, 301 
Style of prophets, 338 seq. 
Sufficient reason, law of, 

82 
Suffixes, 56 

Sulpicius, Severus, 489 
Supernatural, 490, 537 
Supernaturalists, 492 
Surenhusius, 232 
Survey of Western Pales- 
tine, 508 
Susanna, 63 
Suspended letters, 177 
Swete, H. B., 138, 196, 

197, 198, 199, 209 
Symbols of faith, 114 
Symmachus' version, 191 
Synod of Carthage, 137, 

138 
Synod of Hippo, 137, 138 
Synagogues, 188 
Synagogue rolls, 183 
Synagogue worship, 125 
Synonyms in Hebrew, 57, 

58 
Syntactical differences, 300 
Syriac language, 49 
Syriac versions, 212 
Syrian text, 204 seq. 

Tables of stone, 169 
Talmud, 23, 121, 141, 170, 

174, 176, 177, 178, 179, 

183, 191, 211, 232 seq., 

429 
Talmud, Jerusalem, 233 
Tanaim, 253seg.,334 
Tanchuma, 235 
Targum, 23, 125, 175, 210 

seq. 
Targum, Jonathan, 211, 

236 
Targum, Onkelos, 211, 236 
Targum, Yerushalmi, 211 
Tatran, 134, 212, 488 
Taverner, Rich., 215 
Tawus, Jacob, 214* 
Taylor, Chas., 121 



Taylor, Francis, 212, 249, 
250, 462, 467 

Taylor, Isaac, 89 

Taylor, John, 468, 469, 
470, 475 

Temperaments, 569 

Ten Words, 118, 169 

Terry, M. S., 447 

Tertullian, 257, 447, 451 

Testimony of London min- 
isters, 153 

Text of Ben Asher, 231 

Thayer, J. H., 70 

Thebaic version, 195 

Theile, E. G. W., 187 

Theodore of Mopsuestia, 
137, 138, 258, 449, 452, 
454 

Theodoret, 138 

Theodotian, 191, 200 

Theophanies, 337, 542 seq. 

Theophylact, 241 

Tholuck, A., 223, 443, 575 

Thomson, W. M., 507 

Thousand and One Nights, 
92 

Tiele, C. P., 506 

Tischendorf, Const., 196, 
197, 228, 241, 264 

Tischendorf 's text, 208 

Titus, 175 

Tobia, 234 

Tobler, T., 507 

Tosaphoth, 234 

Tosephtoth, 233 

Toy, C. H., 10, 20, 210, 
286, 290, 350, 587 

Traditional opinion, 109 
seq. 

Traditional sense, 453 

Transcriptional probabil- 
ity, 265 

Translations and inspira- 
tion, 622 

Trapp, John, 467 

Tregelles, S. P., 228 

Tregelles' text, 209 

Trench, R. C, 73 

Tristram, H. B., 507 

Trullan council, 137 

Trumbull, H. C, 507 

Tiibingen school, 499 

Tuckney, Ant,, 145 

Turner, S. H., 260, 284, 
474 

Turpie, D. M., 211 

Turretine, J. Alp., 225, 470 

Turretine, Fr., 147, 223, 
621 



Tychonius, 449 

Tychsen, 185 

Tyndale, AVm., 105, 106, 

214, 456, 457 
Twisse, Wm., 84 
Types of Biblical History, 

539 seq. 

Ugolino, 233, 234, 490 

Ulenberg, 217 

Ullmann, Karl, 495, 496, 
498 

Uncials, 194 seq. 

Union Theological Semi- 
nary, 288 seq. 

Unity and Variety, 606 

Usher, J., 186, 225, 248, 
460,461,466,490 

Usteri, L., 588 

Valla, 219 

Van Dale, Anton, 275 
Van der Hooght, 187 
Van Ess, Leauder, 214 
Van Liesveldt, Jacob, 217 
Van Oosterzee, J. J., 584, 

597 
Van Uttenhove, 217 
Vater, J. S., 282 
Vatican codex, 138 
Vatke, Wm., 499, 504, 

577, 585 
Verbal inspiration, 223 
Vercellone, 203 
Via media, 156 
Vigouroux, F,, 507 
Vincent, M. R., 71,299 
Vindictiveness, 646 
Virgin-birth, 522 seq. 
VisGher, Eberh., 298 
Vitringa, 276, 490 
Voetius, 147, 621 
Volkmar, G., 499 
Vollers, 189 
Voltaire, 80 
Vowel points, 59, 181, 220 

seq. 
Vulgate version, 23, 173, 

213 seq. 

Waehner, 430, 491 
Walch, J. G., 247 
Walton, Brian, 222, 223, 

224, 246, 259 
Warfield, B. B., 320, 609, 

625 
Watson, Thos., 462 
Weber, F., 429 
Weiss, B., 209, 272, 283, 



688 



INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS 



325, 326,327,330,498, 
500,583, 589,598 

Weiss, J. H., 234 

Weizsacker, Carl, 63, 499 . 
591 

Wellhausen, Julius, 203, 
290, 504, 505, 585 

Wendt, H. H., 498, 589 

Wenrich, 363 

Wesley, John, 482 

Westcott, B. F., 86, 89, 90 

Westcott and Hort, 190, 
196, 197, 200, 201, 202- 
206,209,228,231,240, 
242,264, 299, 301, 302 

Western text, 201-203, 
240 

Westminster Assembly, 83, 
84, 152, 248 

Westminster Confession, 8, 
15, 25, 92, 99, 115, 150, 
461, 625, 653 

Westminster Larger Cate- 
chism, 659 

Westminster Shorter Cate- 
chism, 15, 83, 92, 661 



Wetzstein text, 207 
Wetzstein, J. C, 227, 507 
Whately, R., 35, 105 
What is God? 83 
Whichcote, Benj., 145 
Whiston, Wm., 237 
Whitby, Dan., 468,470 
White, A. D., 9, 10 
Whitehouse, O., 47 
Whittingham, Wm., 215 
Wickes,W.,181,182, 184, 

185 
Wicklif, 214, 455, 456 
Winckler, Hugo, 48 
Winer, G. B., 70, 71 
Witness of Holy Spirit, 

165 seq. 
Witsius, Herm., 259, 276 
Wogue, 221, 232, 430, 431, 

433 
Word of God, 634 
Word of Peace, 100, 101 
Words in Law, 560, 561 
Workman, G. C, 189 
Wrede, Wm., 591, 594, 

605 



Wright, C.H.H., 255, 311, 

324 
Wright, Wm., 46, 361,362, 

470 
Wiinsche, Aug., 63, 234, 

338, 417 

Ximenes, 140, 186, 219 

Yalqut Shimeoni, 235 
Yanai, 232 

Zacharia, G. T., 469, 575 
Zahn, Theo., 134 
Zealots, 128 
Zeller, Edw., 499 
Zerubbabel, 59, 63 
Zezschwitz, 66, 72, 73 
Zimmern, H., 45 
Zockler, O., 312 
Zohar, 221 
Zschokke, 589 
Zunz, L., 63, 128, 233 
Zurich consensus, 621 
Zwingli, 80, 220, 224, 248, 
457 



BY CHARLES A. BRIGGS, D.D. 

Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical Theology 
in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers, 

153-157 Fifth Avenue, New York. 



Crown 8vo 

A General Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture. Net . I3.00 
Messianic Prophecy : The Prediction of the Fulfihuent of Redemp- 
tion through the Messiah. Seveiith Edition . . . . $2.50 

The Messiah of the Gospels $2.00 

The Messiah of the Apostles . . o . . . . $3.00 

The Higher Criticism of the Hexateuch. New Edition. Revised 

and enlarged .......... $2.50 

The Bible, the Church, and the Reason : The Three Great Foun- 
tains of Divine Authority. Second Edition .... $1.75 

American Presbyterianism : Its Origin and Early History, together 
with an Appendix of Letters and Documents, many of which 

have recently been discovered. With maps .... $3.00 

Whither? A Theological Question for the Times. Third Edition $1.75 
The Authority of Holy Scripture : An Inaugural Address. Ninth 

Edition, paper .......... .50 

The Defense of Professor Briggs. Paper, net 50 

The Case against Professor Briggs. In three parts, paper. Parts 

L and II., each, 50 cents; Part III .75 



A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 
OF HOLY SCRIPTURE. 

The Principles, Methods, History, and Results of its Several Depart= 
ments, and of the Whole. Crown 8vo. $3.00 net. 

Dr. Briggs's new book covers the whole ground of BibHcal Study, 
gives a history of every department, with ample illustrations from the 
New Testament as well as from the Old, and states the results thus far 
attained, the present problems, and the aims for the future. It is 
written so that any intelligent person can read it with enjoyment and 
profit. The work takes the place of the author's Biblical Study, which 
has been extraordinarily successful, and which has been here revised, 
enlarged to double its former size, and entirely reset, so that it is essen- 
tially a new book. 



2 By Professor Charles A. Briggs^ D.D. 

MESSIANIC PROPHECY: The Prediction of the 
Fulfilment of Redemption through the Messiah. 

A Critical Study of the Messianic passages of the Old Testament in 
the order of their development. 

Seventh Edition. Crown 8vo. $2.50. 



" Messianic Prophecy is a subject of no common interest, and this book is no or- 
dinary book. It is, on the contrary, a work of the very first order, the ripe product 
of years of study upon the highest themes. It is exegesis in master-hand, about its 

noblest business It has been worth while to commend this book at some 

length to the attention of Bible students, because both the subject and the treatment 
entitle it to rank among the very foremost works of the generation in the department 
of Exegetical Theology. Union Seminary is to be congratulated that it is one of her 
professors who, in a noble line of succession has produced it. The American Church 
is to be congratulated that the author is an American, and Presbyterians that he is a 
Presbyterian. A Church that can yield such books has large possibilities." — New 
York Evangelist. 

*' It is second in importance to no theological work which has appeared in this 
country during the present century." — The Critic. 

" His arduous labor has been well expended, for he has finally produced a book 
which will give great pleasure to Christians of all denominations The pro- 
found learning displayed in the book commends it to the purchase of all clergymen 
who wish for the most critical and exact exposition of a difficult theme; while its 
earnestness and eloquence will win for it a place in the library of every devout lay- 
man," — New Yox^ Journal of Commerce. 

" It is rich with the fruits of years of zealous and unwearied study, and of an ample 
learning. In it we have the first English work on Messianic Prophecy which stands 
on the level of modern Biblical studies. It is one of the most important and valuable 
contributions of American scholarship to those studies. It is always more than in- 
structive : it is spiritually helpful. We commend the work not only to ministers, but 
to intelligent laymen." — The Independent. 

" On the pervading and multiform character of this promise, see a recent, as well 
as valuable authority, in the volume of Dr. Briggs, of the New York Theological 
Seminary, on ' Messianic Prophecy.' " — W. E. Gladstone. 

" Professor Briggs's Messianic Prophecy is a most excellent book, in which I 
greatly rejoice." — Professor Franz Delitzsch. 

" All scholars will join in recognizing its singular usefulness as a text-book. It has 
been much wanted." — Rev. Canon Cheyne. 

" It is a book that will be consulted and prized by the learned, and that will add 
to the author's deservedly high reputation for scholarship. Evidences of the ability, 
learning, and patient research of the author are apparent from the beginning to the 
end of the volume, while the style is remarkably fine." — Philadelphia Presbyterian. 

" His new book on Messianic Prophecy is a worthy companion to his indispen- 
sable text-book on Biblical study. . . . What is most of all required to insure the 
future of Old Testament studies in this country is that those who teach should satisfy 
their students of their historic connection with the religion and theology of the past. 
Professor Briggs has the consciousness of such a connection in a very full degree, and 
yet he combines this with a frank and unreserved adhesion to the principles of modern 
criticism. ... lie has produced the first English text-book on the subject of Mes- 
sianic Prophecy which a modern teacher can use." — London Academy. 



By Professor Charles A. Briggs, D.D. 
THE MESSIAH OF THE GOSPELS, 

Crown 8vo. $2.00. 



THE MESSIAH OF THE APOSTLES. 

Crown 8vo. $3.00. 

Professor Briggs in these two volumes takes up the ideas presented 
in the author's Messianic Prophecy of the Old Testament, and traces 
their development in New Testament prophecy. The method and 
scope of the work are entirely original ; and it is full of fresh statements 
of the doctrine of the person and work of Christ, as the result of the 
new point of view that is taken. 

" It is learned, sound, evangelical, and is a useful contribution to the Christologi- 
cal literature of the day." — New York Tribune. 

" Dr. Briggs is to be congratulated on having brought to a successful termination 
this truly remarkable series of volumes on one of the most important themes of Bibli- 
cal study. The Christology of the New Testament is likely to wait long for a more 
competent and more successful expositor." — The Christian Register. 

" As we lay the book down, we have a renewed sense of the courage, independ- 
ence, and erudition of the author." — TAe Churchman. 



THE BIBLE, THE CHURCH, AND THE REASON: 

The Three Great Fountains of Divine Authority. 

Second Edition. Crown 8vo. $1.75. 

" An impartial judgment will not fail to give full credit for purity of motive and 
loftiness of purpose to a man who writes like this." — The Evangelist. 

" It consists of lectures delivered at different times since the recent assault upon 
him. . . . He simply elaborates and substantiates the positions in his inaugural which 
have subjected him to public criticism." — The Christian Union. 

" The problems which are discussed with masterly power in this volume are not 
those of Presbyterianism, or of Protestantism, but of Christianity, and, indeed, of all 
Biblical religion. To any man for whom the question of God and revelation has an 
endlessly fascinating interest, the book will prove suggestive and stimulating. We 
cannot see why even the Israelite and the Roman Catholic should not desire to taste 
— despite the traditions of synagogue and Mother Church — this latest forbidden 
fruit of the tree of knowledge." — The Literary World. 



4 By Professor Charles A. Briggs, D. D. 

THE HIGHER CRITICISM OF THE HEXATEUCH. 

New Edition, revised and enlarged. Crown 8vo. $2.50. 

" When this book first appeared it was recognized as a masterly production. Written 
in a clear style, and full of the largest learning, it easily took a foremost place in dis- 
cussions of the subject. ... It appears again in a new and thoroughly revised edition, 
with fuller statements on many points. We congratulate the author upon his sound- 
ness of judgment and his clearness of statement, as well as upon the admirable temper 
which his book has preserved." — The American Journal of Theology. 

" The pivotal question in Old Testament study still remains that of the authorship 
and composition of the Pentateuch; and this work of Dr. Briggs is an admirable 
introduction to this subject, giving a history and abundant illustrations of the criti- 
cism." — Edward L. Curtis, Professor of Hebrew Language and Literature at Yale. 



WHITHER? A THEOLOGICAL QUESTION FOR 

THE TIMES. 

Third Edition. Crown 8vo. $1.75. 

" He shows that genuine Christianity has nothing to lose but much to gain by 
unfettered thought and by the ripest modern scholarship, . . . and that the ' higher 
criticism ' of which timid and unscholarly souls are so much afraid, is really making 
the Bible more manifestly the Book of God, by relieving it from the false interpreta- 
tions of men." — Philadelphia Press. 

" It is written in nervous, virile English that holds attention. It has unusual grasp 
and force. The title and the chapter headings suggest compression : * Whither ? ' 
' Drifting,' * Orthodoxy,' * Changes,' ' Shifting,' * Excesses,' ' Failures,' ' Departures,' 
* Perplexities,' ' Barriers,' * Thither.' There is a whole history in some of these words, 
and a whole sermon in others." — The Critic. 



AMERICAN PRESBYTERIANISM : 

Its Origin and Early History, together with an Appendix of Letters 
and Documents, many of which have recently been discovered. 

Crown 8vo, with maps. $3.00. 

" His vigorous, skilful, and comprehensive researches put all Protestant Christians, 
and especially Congregationalists, under obligation to him." — Boston Congregation- 
alist. 

" This is an admirable and exhaustive work, full of vigorous thinking, clear and 
careful statement, incisive and judicious criticism, minute yet comprehensive research. 
It is such a book as only a man with a gift for historical inquiry and an enthusiasm 
for the history and principles of his Church could have produced. It represents an 
amazing amount of labor." — British Quarterly Review. 



CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers, 

153-157 Fifth Avenue, New York. 



JAN 16 1899 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



